Human Wildlife Conflict Mitigation Measures Being Implemented by the Kavango-Zambezi Transfrontier Conservation Area (KAZA TFCA) Partner Countries

KAVANGO ZAMBEZI TRANSFRONTIER CONSERVATION AREA (KAZA TFCA)

Assessment of the human wildlife conflict mitigation measures being implemented by the Kavango-Zambezi Transfrontier Conservation Area (KAZA TFCA) Partner Countries

ZAMBIA

ANGOLA

ZIMBABWE NAMIBIA

BOTSWANA

KAZA Angola 9 062 167 ha 17%

KAZA Botswana 15 366 272 ha 30%

KAZA Namibia 7 151 643 ha 14%

KAZA Zambia 13 263 080 ha 25%

KAZA Zimbabwe 7 147 998 ha 14%

A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures

KAVANGO ZAMBEZI

Acknowledgements TRANSFRONTIER CONSERVATION AREA (KAZA TFCA) The compilation of this report stems from the initiatives of the five partner countries that form the Kavango-Zambezi Transfrontier Conservation Area Assessment of the (KAZA TFCA). The authors would like to thank the partner countries, KAZA TFCA Secretariat and the German Development Bank for funding and human wildlife conflict supporting this initiative. We would also want to extend our thanks to Peace mitigation measures Parks Foundation who are the contracting party and for providing all the being implemented by the Kavango-Zambezi Transfrontier maps used in this document. Many thanks to the participants of the several meetings, tele-conferences, e-mails and workshops whose efforts provided a Conservation Area (KAZA TFCA) Partner Countries framework for this document. In addition, we thank the many experts, practitioners and communities within the KAZA network and beyond, who have contributed vital information and insight in the production of this report. KAZA TFCA 2016 KAZA WITH WORKING PEOPLE

CONNECTED CONSERVATION 758 Aerodrome P.O. Box 37, Victoria Falls, Zimbabwe Tel. +263 13 46672 www.connectedconservation.com

Cite as: KAZA-TFCA (2016) Assessment of the human wildlife conflict mitigation measures being implemented by the Kavango-Zambezi Transfrontier Conservation Area (KAZA TFCA) partner countries. Report to the KAZA TFCA Secretariat (BMZ No.: 2009 66 788 and BMZ No.: 2006 65 646).

KAZA Website: www.kavangozambezi.org PPF: www.peaceparks.co.za Connected Conservation: www.connectedconservation.com Hamilton-Fynch: www.hamiltonfynch.com

Hamilton-Fynch: Layout and design. © P Sutera A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. iii KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures

Executive Summary Recommendations standardized reporting format (see suggested synthesis of << Aim to reduce HWC and not solving it completely through various methods currently in use). Introduction a number of suggested tools specific for each problem << Policy harmonization is vital particularly where shared natural resources are in use. Human wildlife conflict (HWC) is arguably one of the most on the ground. The consultant verified these hotspots using animal species and directed at positive incentives for people. << Need to develop a KAZA region HWC mitigation strategy pressing conservation issues across the Kavango-Zambezi available Problem Animal Control (PAC) data at local, national << Compliment current mitigation tools by adapting some of that aims at reducing conflict and improving people’s Transfrontier Conservation Area (KAZA TFCA) where a or regional offices using triangulation and cross validation the suggested measures. livelihoods. significant number of people live in areas that abut wildlife methods. << Need to capacitate communities and resource persons << Communities facing crop and livestock damage from range. If KAZA TFCA is to be successful, accepted and who work directly on mitigating the conflict. wildlife need alternative ways to cushion themselves from adopted by stakeholders, particularly communities We assessed the self-reliance scheme for loss of property << Improve the efficacy, sustainability and cost effectiveness the vagaries of HWC. throughout the TFCA, finding ways to reduce HWC and (crops and livestock) due to wildlife depredation such as the of mitigation tools by constant improvement, promote human-wildlife coexistence is a prerequisite. Human Wildlife Self-Reliance Scheme (HWSRS) in Namibia innovation and changing of the tools to discourage We hope that this report will be useful to the governments of Managers and or communities attempting to reduce crop and by evaluating the system through a Strengths Weaknesses habituation by wildlife and adapt them to suit local the five partner countries and particularly wildlife livestock damage by wildlife encounter a range of complex Opportunities Threats (SWOT) analysis. We evaluated all the conditions. departments. We hope it will help them to develop a regional << Partner countries should implement both short and technical and social issues. This draft report to the KAZA frameworks and processes of the system to provide HWC mitigation strategy, which is important for long-term long-term management strategies that address the causes TFCA Secretariat details an assessment of the HWC mitigation recommendations for replication or adaptation of the scheme success in the conservation and management of wildlife, of HWC in order to ameliorate conflict. natural resources and uplifting the livelihoods of people living tools in use across the KAZA TFCA. to other partner countries. An evaluation of Botswana’s << Partner countries should improve the collection; collation side by side with wildlife in this region. compensation scheme using the same methodological and reporting of conflict data by implementing a The objective of this consultancy was to review and approach completed the task. recommend the most effective, efficient and sustainable HWC mitigation measures for adoption within the KAZA Findings TFCA by the partner countries. We suggest partner countries << HWC is likely to increase in all the partner countries. focus HWC efforts in and around the five-wildlife dispersal << Most common types of conflict across the KAZA land- areas (WDAs) that KAZA are promoting. While some hotspots scape are crop and property damage by wildlife, and will fall outside these areas, they will nevertheless be useful human and wildlife death, or injury. 1 for countries to prioritise efforts in the context of KAZA. This << Traditional methods of deterring wildlife are the most common ways of mitigating conflict. review also included the partner countries’ HWC policies, << Lack of capacity (knowledge and resources) to mitigate which need standardising for effective and sustainable HWC the conflict that is prevalent across all the partner mitigation within the KAZA TFCA. countries. << Most problematic wildlife identified were elephant, lion Methodological approaches used include interviews with and hyena followed by crocodile and hippo. several local and traditional authorities, the KAZA Liaison << Most current mitigation methods are not sustainable, have Officers (KLOs) as well as other stakeholders. The consultant less efficacy and are not cost effective explored these at community, district, provincial and national << The HWCSRS is an effective insurance scheme model that levels to determine the methods in use and their effectiveness needs adoption elsewhere as a strategy to help address HWC. in key HWC hotspots. Furthermore, this enabled an << It is not easy to replicate the HWCSRS in other partner understanding of constraints and concerns at the various countries unless several fundamental conditions, levels concerning implementation of the methods. Expert principles and policies are prevailing in these countries. review of the available HWC literature and related reports << In most of the partner countries, monitoring and from various practitioners in the region and beyond was a evaluation systems of HWC do not exist and where they vital tool in coming up with the current thinking in HWC are available, they need robust upgrading. management. The consultant also identified conflict hot spots, << There is no absolute or single solution to HWC. Reducing possible movement corridors of wildlife and investigated the intensity of this conflict is vital-, i.e. the aim should be the spatial patterns of conflict using Geographic Information mitigation and management not elimination. A holistic approach that addresses root causes over the long term as System (GIS) techniques and most importantly by reviewing well as short-term mitigation. available literature on these aspects. Using ranking and << Controls directed against animals (e.g. disturbance, killing, scoring techniques, the consultant evaluated the effectiveness translocation, species culls and long game-proof fences) of the conflict mitigation methods and the rate of adoption or are far less successful than more positive measures uptake of current methods giving an indication of the directed at people (e.g. Community Based Natural sustainability of some of these measures. However, in the Resources Management (CBNRM) programmes, land use absence of a consolidated HWC database in an electronic planning and zoning, and promoting community format across the partner countries, we relied on a more awareness). subjective identification of hot spots through consultation with management authorities and stakeholders operating

1 ‘Traditional’ deterrents are those that have been devised and carried out by rural communities living alongside wildlife. They generally utilise low-tech materials that are widely available.

viii A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. ix KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures

Table of Contents Acknowledgements ii 10. recommended Institutional Arrangements, Principles and Executive Summary viii Governing Policies 51 10.1. Need for Constitutional Provisions on Wildlife 52 Acronyms vi 10.2. Establishing a Compensation Fund for Wildlife Damage 52 10.3. Data Collection and Mitigation 52 1. Introduction 1 10.4. Specific Interventions 54 1.1. Background to the Consultancy 3 1.2. A Global Historical Overview of Human - Wildlife Relations 4 11. Monitoring and Evaluation Framework 59 1.3. Domestication of Food the Genesis and Basis of Conflict 5 11.1. Current Monitoring and Evaluation 59 1.4. General Drivers of hwc Across the kaza-tfca 6 11.2. Understand, Monitor and Evaluate the Problem 60 1.5. Overview of Human Wildlife Management Policies in the kaza tfca 7 12. recommendations for Sustainable Financing of hwc 61 2. Methodology Used in this Consultancy 9 12.1. Establishment of kaza tfca hwc Mitigation Fund 61 12.2. Recommended Type of Fund 62 3. situational Analysis 11 12.3. Using Wildlife as a Marketing Tool 62

Appendix A1 4. Mitigation Measures Commonly Used Across the Partner Appendix 1: Situational Analysis of Member Countries A2 Countries 15 Appendix 2: Recommended Species-Specifichwc Mitigation Measures A15 4.1. Introduction 15 Appendix 3: Mechanisms for the Exchange of Experiences A38 4.2. Traditional Deterrents 16 Appendix 4: Photographs A39 4.3. Modern Deterrents 16 Appendix 5: Construction of a Barrier for Protection Against Crocodiles A50

5. Cost Benefit Analysis of Mitigation Measures Used Across References A51 kaza tfca. 19 5.1. Low-tech Traditional Tools Mitigation Measures 21 5.2. Medium Tech, Semi-Sophisticated Tools Mitigation Measures 25 5.3. High Tech Mitigation Measures 29 5.4. Species-Specific Mitigation Measures-Livestock Depredation 31 5.5. Mitigation Measures Developed and Used Outside of the kaza tfca. 32

6. Recommended hwc Mitigation Tools 33 6.1. Mitigation Against Crop Raiding 33 6.2. Mitigation Against Livestock Depredation 35 6.3. Physical Trapping Options 35 6.4. Chemical Capture and Translocation 35 6.5. The Use of Sophisticated Surveillance Systems 35 6.6. Urban Mitigation Approaches 36

7. Recommended Species-Specific hwc Mitigation Measures 37

8. schemes to Compensate People for Loss to Wildlife 41 8.1. Compensation in Perspective 41 8.2. Botswana’s Compensation Scheme 42 8.3. Common Challenges of Compensation Schemes 42 8.4. Namibia’s Self Reliance System 43

9. capacity Needs Assessment for Communities 47 9.1. Training in Mitigation Strategies 47 9.2. Data Collection 48 9.3. Training Needs Findings 48 8.4. Training Needs Assessment Conclusion 50

iv A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. v KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures

Acronyms

CBNRM: Community Based Natural Resource Management IUCN/SSC The World Conservation Union/Species Survival Commission CBO: Community Based Organisation IWRM Integrated Water Resources Management ACE Ambush Chilli Educator KAZA TFCA Kavango-Zambezi Transfrontier Conservation Area AfESG African Elephant Specialist Group KfW Kreditanstalt für Wiederaufbau BAM Butorphenol, Azaperone and Medetomidine KLO KAZA Liaison Officer BOCOBONET Botswana Community Based Organisations Network LED Light Emitting Diode CAMPFIRE Communal Areas Management Programme for Indigenous Resources LUCIS Land Use Conflict Identification Strategy CARACAL Centre for Conservation of African Resources MET Ministry of Environment and Tourism CBCM Community Based Conflict Mitigation MOU Memorandum of Understanding CBC Community Based Conservation NAP National Action Plan CBD Convention on Biological Diversity NGO Non-Governmental Organization CBNRM Community Based Natural Resources Management NBHWC Northern Botswana Human Wildlife Coexistence (Project) CBO Community Based Organization ODMP Okavango Delta Management Plan CCTV Closed Circuit TV OERP Okavango Elephant Research Project CDC Constituency Development Committee ORI Okavango Research Institute CHA Controlled Hunting Area PA Protected Area CTA Conditioned Taste Aversion PAC Problem Animal Control CITES Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora SADC Southern African Development Community DDC District Development Committee SAREP Southern African Regional Environmental Project DWNP Department of Wildlife and National Parks SMS Short Message Service EPDT Elephant Pepper Development Trust SWOT Strengths Weaknesses Opportunities Threats FAO Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations USD United States Dollar GEF Global Environmental Fund TFCA Transfrontier Conservation Area GIS Geographic Information System TNA Training Needs Assessment GLTP Great Limpopo Transfrontier Park VDC Village Development Committee GMTFCA Greater Mapungubwe Transfrontier Conservation Area WCP Wildlife Conservation Policy GPS Global Positioning System WDA Wildlife Dispersal Area HACSIS Human Animal Conflict Self Insurance Scheme WMA Wildlife Management Area HWSRS Human Wildlife Self Reliance Scheme ZAWA Zambia Wildlife Authority HCC Human Crocodile Conflict HEC Human Elephant Conflict HWC Human Wildlife Conflict HWCSRS Human Wildlife Conflict Self-Reliance Scheme IRBM Okavango Integrated River Basin Management Project ISPAAD Integrated Support Programme for Arable Agricultural Development

vi A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. vii KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures

1. Introduction

The governments of Angola, Botswana, Namibia, Zambia and Zimbabwe agreed to establish a Transfrontier Conservation Area (TFCA) known as the Kavango- Zambezi TFCA, also known as the KAZA TFCA. The KAZA TFCA is a development project of the Southern African Development Community (SADC), the Governments of five partner countries and co-financed by the Federal Republic of Germany through Kreditanstalt für Wiederaufbau (KfW).

In December 2006, the governments of the five countries signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) regarding the establishment of the KAZA TFCA, with the formal establishment on 18 August 2011, when the governments of the partner countries signed a treaty in Luanda, Angola. The TFCA covers about 520,000 square kilometres of land spanning across the international boundaries of Angola, Botswana, Namibia, Zambia, and Zimbabwe, linking conservation areas that constitute protected national parks, wildlife management areas, forest reserves, communal lands and settled areas (Figure 1). The landscape is host to the largest contiguous population of the African elephant, about 250,000, and about one quarter of the African wild dog population as well as 3 iconic world heritage sites.

x A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. 1 KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures

1.1. Background to the Consultancy It is now widely recognized that humans have profoundly affected wildlife and the environment in many ways. This has manifested through habitat loss, pollution, introduction and spread of exotic and invasive species, overexploitation, and climate change. Human wildlife conflict (HWC) is a worldwide phenomenon and is a manifestation of the detrimental impact humans are having on the earth. While this conflict has existed since time immemorial, its intensity has increased in recent years. The driving forces behind this problem are many. Some of them include growth in the human population; increase in land usage to harness the land and its resources for economic activities and loss of the wildlife habitat. Migration of people because of shocks such as floods, droughts and civil unrest, direct persecution of wildlife due to perceived economic losses resulting from livestock predation or crop raiding; and an increase in wildlife populations (Graham, Berckerman and Thirgood, 2004).

According to the Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO frameworks for effectively and efficiently addressing HWCs 2009), the impact of HWC is more serious in the tropics of and promoting harmony between biodiversity conservation the developing world than in the developed world because of and human development. these countries’ greater dependence on livestock as a livelihood strategy and source of income. In the KAZA, there As multiple strategies are in use in the KAZA TFCA to are at least four aspects of HWC, namely: (1) space conflict; mitigate HWCs and compensate losses inflicted by wildlife, (2) crop raiding; (3) death of humans; and (4) predation of the consultant had to objectively evaluate, rank and livestock. In addition, conflict also occurs when there is recommend an integrated approach to HWC mitigation. The general destruction of property by wild animals. task included reviewing mechanisms for compensating/ off-setting losses, where applicable due to wildlife In the KAZA, where many rural people live in close proximity depredation, for adoption within the KAZA TFCA based on to wildlife, even one incident of property, crop or livestock their efficacy, cost-effectiveness and sustainability (in terms of loss can impose severe economic and livelihood hardship on self-financing by the affected communities). individuals and families. It can also produce psychological and social costs that are unquantifiable or compensated. Such The consultant would also tap into experiences from other unquantifiable costs include the opportunity costs or the fear SADC countries (and possibly further afield, if there are arising from potential attacks against oneself and one’s relevant examples), and distil elements that would enhance property. In retaliation, humans usually shoot, poison, strategies for sustainable HWC mitigation in the KAZA TFCA. capture, injure or kill the animals. Such human induced mortality affects not only the population viability of some of In the KAZA region, HWC varies according to geography, land the most endangered species, but also has broader use patterns, human behaviour, livelihoods, and traditions, Figure 1: Map of study area (Source: KAZA Secretariat website www.kavangozambezi.org ) environmental impacts on the ecosystem equilibrium and and the habitat and behaviour of wildlife. There is a need biodiversity preservation (Distefano, 2005). for better understanding and awareness of the nature and The vision of the KAZA TFCA is “To establish a world-class transfrontier conservation and tourism destination area in the complexity of factors contributing to HWCs in the five partner Okavango and Zambezi river basins, supporting sustainable development in this region by 2030”. The mission is “To Reconciling the need for re-establishing seasonal wildlife countries, including climatic factors, land use, agricultural sustainably manage the Kavango-Zambezi ecosystems, and its heritage and cultural resources based on best conservation and movements with the socioeconomic development practices and wildlife management initiatives as well as tourism models for the socio-economic well-being of the communities and other stakeholders in and around the KAZA region aspirations of local residents is challenged by HWC, which mitigation measures in use. through harmonization of policies, strategies and practices.” is one of the most profound wildlife management problems facing the KAZA TFCA, inflicting damage to property In the KAZA TFCA landscape, several factors and practices in Two categories form the KAZA TFCA objectives, namely: (a) ecological and (b) socio-economic. The former focus on protection (infrastructure, crops and livestock), and in some instances, recent decades have created favourable environmental of internationally shared ecosystems; increasing the area available for wildlife and plant populations; and re-establishment of loss of human life. HWC impacts species conservation, conditions for most wildlife populations (particularly transboundary seasonal wildlife dispersal routes; and the latter is concerned among others, with increasing economic jeopardizes human livelihood and safety, and requires elephants) to stabilize with other reports indicating an opportunities for the local communities who often bear the opportunity cost of living with wildlife. The KAZA Treaty commits increased resources to mitigate. increase in elephant numbers (Blanc et al., 2007) in countries the governments, among other ideals, to: such as Botswana and Namibia. In most of the landscape, A number of HWC mitigation measures are in use in the there are currently underway enhanced government and << “Ensure co-operation at the national level among governmental authorities, communities, non-governmental KAZA TFCA partner countries. Many of these are targeting private partner efforts to conserve and protect wildlife and organisations and the private sector; single and multiple species, including implementation of their habitats. In support of “sustainable development”, there << Co-operate to develop common approaches to natural resources management and tourism development and; innovative approaches to compensate/offset losses inflicted is recognition of the importance of the natural environment << Collaborate to achieve the objectives of relevant international agreements to which they are party and: by wildlife, as in the case of the Human Wildlife Self-Reliance in the lives of communities living side by side with wildlife. << Develop and implement programmes that shall enhance the sustainable use of natural and cultural heritage resources to Scheme (HWSRS) in Namibia as well as using holistic However, these efforts may have incidental consequences of improve the livelihoods of local communities within and around the KAZA TFCA and thus contribute towards poverty management approaches that address the root causes of increasing human-wildlife interface and interactions, which reduction”. conflict alongside the immediate needs of farmers e.g. need proper management to maintain a healthy balance Ecoexist Project 3, Botswana. between the need for socio-economic development and This document focuses mostly on those measures people living with wildlife in the KAZA landscape are currently using in protection of the natural environment. managing conflict between people and wildlife, current policy options available and recommendations on cost effective and Irrespective of these efforts, stakeholders within the KAZA sustainable methods that people affected by this conflict can and may use to reduce the conflict.2 TFCA do not commonly understand the efficacy, cost- The partner countries (through the KAZA TFCA Secretariat) effectiveness and sustainability of these HWC mitigation have long realized the growing urgency to address the measures. In view of this, the KAZA TFCA engaged the problem of HWCs in all the respective countries. Through a consultant to review the HWC mitigation strategies currently number of initiatives (including the socio-economic survey in use in the KAZA TFCA, including policies that provide conducted to date) they have also recognized that a

2 Source: Terms of reference 3 http://www.ecoexistproject.org/

2 A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. 3 KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures

enhanced government and private partner efforts to conserve As such, prior, during and after the Project Inception meeting primates, antelopes, hippopotamus, bush pigs, predators and While humans seem to have been the only ones on the and protect wildlife and their habitats. In support of in September 2015 in Kasane, Botswana, the Consultant elephants (Bell, 1984). Eltringham (1980) aptly put it across receiving end of wildlife depredations, wildlife has also “sustainable development”, there is recognition of the solicited information from various stakeholders to develop this when stating that ‘…wild animals that directly compete with suffered human induced “persecution”. Graham (2006) noted importance of the natural environment in the lives of report. Research identified the need to address urgently the humans for resources such as water or food quickly become a that the accounts of early European travellers and communities living side by side with wildlife. However, these growing severity of conflicts involving different wildlife species. “problem animal…” explorers in Africa indicated a conspicuous absence of efforts may have incidental consequences of increasing These formal and informal meetings, consultations and elephants and other large mammals in some apparently human-wildlife interface and interactions, which need proper literature review formed the basis of the several key findings Fossil records show that the first hominids fell prey to the suitable areas suggesting that hunting by indigenous Africans management to maintain a healthy balance between the need and outputs. These outputs and the consultancy’s terms of animals with which they shared their habitats and shelters. had contributed to localised extirpations (e.g. Neumann, for socio-economic development and protection of the natural reference form the foundations of this report. Forensic evidence has recently demonstrated that the “Taung 1898; Selous, 1881; Thomson, 1885). He further environment. skull”, perhaps the most famous hominid fossil, which was hypothesizes that the historical demand for ivory among the This document identifies several key considerations for the discovered in South Africa in 1924, belonged to a child who early civilisations of Rome, Egypt, China and India might have The partner countries (through the KAZA TFCA Secretariat) mitigation of HWC across the KAZA landscape and presents was killed by an eagle two million years ago (Berger, 2006). contributed to the extinction of elephants from Syria around have long realized the growing urgency to address the clear short and long-term mitigation and management San people rock art across Africa frequently portrays people the 4th Century A.D. and from the rest of North Africa by the problem of HWCs in all the respective countries. Through a measures and activities that improves the mitigation of HWC fleeing from predators or other large animals and early 7th Century, citing Spinage (1994). number of initiatives (including the socio-economic survey in the region. Responsible authorities should take on board nineteenth century historians describe areas in Africa and conducted to date) they have also recognized that a the key highlights contained in the report, and provide other parts of the world where elephants invaded human comprehensive plan, based on available knowledge, must be required leadership by exploring and implementing cultivations, causing food shortages and leading to the designed if this conflict is to be reduced, human livelihoods appropriate and site-specific proposed strategies to help displacement of settlements (Barnes, 1996). enhanced and conservation succeed in the long run. ameliorate HWC and improve local livelihoods. This is based Accordingly, the partner countries (through the Secretariat) on the three levels of addressing HWC, namely legal, 1.3. Domestication of Food the Genesis and Basis of Conflict have taken the initiative to engage the consultant to draft institutional (wildlife authority, agriculture, land boards, etc.) It appears as if ever since there has been agriculture, humans have lost crops and livestock to wild animals. Various authorities such a document to guide them in addressing HWC. This has and site level (technologies used to mitigate conflict). agree that Oldfather (1979) finds the earliest records of crop damage by elephants in ancient Egypt as the Greek historian culminated in the compilation of this working document that Diodorous Siculus wrote around 80-20 BC and translated. The Sumerian farmers of antiquity prayed to Ninkilim, ‘goddess of forms a guide on finding a long-term solution to this problem. field mice and vermin in general’ lest they harm the growing grain (Kramer, 1936, cited by Naughton-Treves, 1996). Sukumar (1989) wrote of Sanskrit texts from the 6th century BC that chronicled the devastation of the Anga Kingdom by wild 1.2. A Global Historical Overview of Human - Wildlife Relations elephants and other animals. Studies of dwelling sites of Neolithic man suggest that in addition to hunting, early humans ate a The relationship between wildlife and rural people has, been historically antagonistic (Crosby, 1986). Either people engaged in wide range of wild plants (Osborn, 1998). subsistence hunting for food or the animals ate peoples’ crops, killing livestock, or occasionally the people themselves. There are a few exceptions where a ‘neutral’ relationship exists, usually for religious or cultural reasons (Osborn, 1998). There are also These early humans presumably selected plants for their as wildlife shifted their range beyond the intense hunting a few examples where wildlife and humans living in close proximity co-exist, without conflict (Inamdar, 1996). pleasant taste and ‘sensory’ value (i.e. plants low in spheres of the European big game market. The creation of deleterious chemicals and high in sugars). The first recorded game laws and game departments effectively transferred It is important to note, however, that not all interaction between people and elephants is negative (Graham, 2006). Many cultivation of plants occurred in Iraq in approximately 7000 responsibility for crop pest management from the local people animals are valued as a source of protein and some large mammals are revered as religious symbols (Crosby, 1986). From old BC, the first crops domesticated being wheat and barley living with large mammal pests such as elephants, buffalos texts, it appears as if almost all wild animals are potential threats or competitors to people. It is apparent that birds of prey eat (Purseglove, 1972). Past studies do indicate that human and hippos, to the colonial authority (Graham, 2006). This chickens and ducks, other birds eat grains, there is a general fear of most reptiles and most mammals will feed on either live- selection of wild species for favourable traits to cultivate and complicated the management of HWC as the local people stock or crops (Osborn, 1998). A variety of animals have been documented as in conflict with farmers, including birds, rodents, breed has meant that many naturally occurring defence relinquished their former responsibility to the colonial chemicals in plant tissue have disappeared or have been establishment (now replaced by institutions such as the parks reduced in quantity through selective breeding (Parker et al., authorities), a situation prevailing to this day. 2007). The changes that have resulted through the domestication of wild plants include the loss of adaptations There are several definitions of HWC. Earlier the World such as spines or thorns, reduction in the development of Wide Fund for Nature (WWF, 2005) defined HWC as “any fibrous tissues and improvement of palatability (Purseglove, interaction between humans and wildlife that results in 1972). As humans adopted a pastoralist way of life and began negative impacts on human social, economic or cultural life, to cultivate, the relationship with wildlife changed as both on the conservation of wildlife populations, or on the these lifestyles altered the structure of the ecosystem in which environment.” The ‘Creating Co-existence’ workshop at the they were conducted (Parker, 1984; Osborn, 1998). The fifth Annual World Parks Congress defined HWC in the presence of high densities of wildlife in pre-c`olonial Africa is context of human goals and animal needs as “HWC occurs one of the reasons that may have presented a major when the needs and behaviour of wildlife impact constraint to cultivation and livestock rearing (Barnes, 1996; negatively on the goals of humans or when the goals of Hoare, 1999; Parker & Graham, 1989; Graham, 2006). The humans negatively impact the needs of wildlife” (Madden, pre-colonial African landscape is often characterized as small, 2004). A review by the United States Geological Survey scattered human settlements existing in a ‘sea of wildlife’ defines HWC in two contexts; firstly, actions by wildlife (Parker & Graham, 1989; Graham, 2006). However, the conflict with human goals, i.e. life, livelihood and life-style, arrival of Europeans and the establishment of colonial and, secondly, human activities threaten the safety and administration in Africa marked the beginning of a new phase survival of wildlife (Cline, et al., 2007). Messmer (2000) points in human-wildlife interaction (Graham, 2006). The coming out that the phrase human–wildlife conflicts describe of the early European settlers heightened hunting of wildlife situations that involve any negative interactions between and altered the spatial distribution of large mammals such as humans and wildlife. elephants. Graham (2006) argues that this is likely to have resulted in major transitions in the spatial occurrence of HWC

4 A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. 5 KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures

mammals such as elephants. Graham (2006) argues that this negative impacts on human social, economic or cultural life, alteration in the movement patterns of elephants thereby There is no doubt that the KAZA TFCA faces great challenges is likely to have resulted in major transitions in the spatial on the conservation of wildlife populations, or on the triggering conflict in some areas such as Boteti and Rakops in in the management of HWC. One important part of the occurrence of HWC as wildlife shifted their range beyond the environment.” The ‘Creating Co-existence’ workshop at the the Central District of Botswana. solution to this problem is the development of environmental intense hunting spheres of the European big game market. fifth Annual World Parks Congress defined HWC in the laws, particularly land use and wildlife laws, which are The creation of game laws and game departments effectively context of human goals and animal needs as “HWC occurs Other causes of conflict include bad planning that includes; effective in preventing, deterring and mitigating HWC. To transferred responsibility for crop pest management from the when the needs and behaviour of wildlife impact negatively scattered lands, living adjacent to Protected Area (PA) bound- understand the shortfalls in HWC management for the KAZA local people living with large mammal pests such as on the goals of humans or when the goals of humans aries, herding livestock within or too close to PA boundaries TFCA countries, it is important to assess the policies dealing elephants, buffalos and hippos, to the colonial authority negatively impact the needs of wildlife” (Madden, 2004). A and commuting between villages (especially illegal cattle with this topic. Legislation and policy at global, regional and (Graham, 2006). This complicated the management of HWC review by the United States Geological Survey defines HWC posts), and a poor understanding of animal behaviour such as national levels provides the framework within which HWC as the local people relinquished their former responsibility to in two contexts; firstly, actions by wildlife conflict with human how animals approach or avoid human settlement, crops and management strategies are developed. the colonial establishment (now replaced by institutions such goals, i.e. life, livelihood and life-style, and, secondly, human livestock. as the parks authorities), a situation prevailing to this day. activities threaten the safety and survival of wildlife (Cline, et The Ecoexist project in the Okavango district of Botswana al., 2007). Messmer (2000) points out that the phrase human– << Ban on hunting and greater control over PAC designed a schematic web that depicts the many facets and There are several definitions of HWC. Earlier the World Wide wildlife conflicts describe situations that involve any negative (lethal control) connectivity of the drivers of HWC with a major focus on Fund for Nature (WWF, 2005) defined HWC as “any interactions between humans and wildlife. In the past hunting wildlife for sport or meat helped to keep HEC. It shows how several factors manifest in driving HEC interaction between humans and wildlife that results in conflict with problem animals under control. Hunting from a local to international level and how the connectivity concessions used to maintain large areas of otherwise of such factors complicates the management of this conflict. 1.4. General Drivers of HWC Across the KAZA-TFCA valueless bush through the provision of water points and While this illustration describes HEC in the eastern management of PAC with human populations in these ranges. Panhandle, it can apply across the KAZA TFCA. Below (page << Increased settlement in wildlife range << Land use transformation Due to the hunting ban in Botswana, waterholes maintenance 8) is their illustration. Demographic and social changes place more people in direct Land use planning and agricultural field allocation seems to has stopped in the hunting areas and wildlife has moved to contact with wildlife: as human populations grow, settlements be problematic as people are often given land in areas known communal lands with a massive increase in HWC.5 expand into and around protected areas (IUCN, World Park to be conflict “hot spots,” such as in the eastern Okavango Congress) as well as in urban and sub-urban areas. As the Panhandle (Songhurst 2012; Songhurst, McCulloch, and transformation of forests, savannah and other ecosystems into Coulson 2015). Zimbabwe’s land reform programme at the 1.5. Overview of Human Wildlife Management Policies in the KAZA TFCA agrarian areas or urban agglomerates is a consequence of the beginning of the millennium involved some people allocated 1.5.1. Global Level increasing demand for land, food production, energy and land in formerly wildlife dominated landscapes making Protection and use of wildlife’s regulation at global level is through multilateral agreements such as the Convention on raw materials. In Botswana, land transformation particularly conflict with wildlife inevitable. In Zambia’s southern Biological Diversity (CBD, Rio de Janeiro, 1992). The three objectives of the CBD include conservation, sustainable use of into crop fields or cattle posts is another major driver of this province, the proliferation of huge commercial farms in the biodiversity components (including wildlife) and fair, equitable sharing of benefits arising from the utilization of genetic conflict. Land apportionment seems to be problematic as is early to mid-2000s along the Zambezi River front resources (Article 1). Sustainable use is using biodiversity components in such a way and at a rate that does not lead to the sometimes given in areas known to be conflict “hot spots”. transformed formerly wildlife habitat diverting traditional long-term decline of the biological diversity thereby meeting the needs and aspirations of present and future generations wildlife dispersal routes into human settlements increasing the (Article 2). The CBD obliges parties to cooperate with each other through relevant international agreements such as KAZA << Habitat loss, degradation and fragmentation propensity of conflict. Treaty in matters of mutual interest like the management of HWC and in areas beyond national jurisdiction for the conservation Habitat destruction poses one of the greatest threats to and sustainable use of biological diversity. wildlife survival outside protected areas (Smith & Kasiki, 2000) << Increasing elephant population as a result of and consequently leads to conflict with people. Some wildlife conservation programmes (elephants) can tolerate relatively high densities of humans, Botswana is the country with the largest elephant population 1.5.2. Regional Level and the two can coexist at many different densities (Hill, 1997). across all the African elephant range states and this population The objectives of the CBD have found expression in regional protocols and treaties focusing on the conservation and However, habitat conversion appears to be the critical factor. which stands at approximately 155,000 (Blanc et al., 2007) is sustainable use of biological resources such as the SADC Protocol on Wildlife Conservation and Law Enforcement of 1999, the Previous research has indicated that when habitat destruction known to be increasing. Namibia and Zimbabwe have seen KAZA Treaty, (Great Limpopo Transfrontier Park (GLTP) Treaty and the Greater Mapungubwe Transfrontier Conservation Area reaches a certain threshold, wildlife can no longer survive. their elephant populations marginally increasing as well over (GMTFCA). The SADC Protocol on Wildlife Conservation and Law Enforcement seeks, among other things, to promote the the years. Much of this increase in population is due to sustainable use of wildlife and facilitate community based natural resources management (CBNRM) which is a key strategy One of the underlying causes of HWC is habitat loss (Desai, pro-conservation programmes implemented and supported being implemented across all five KAZA TFCA countries to manage HWC. 2002). Elephants and lions tend to have large home ranges by the Government, NGOs, and community-based with traditional migration routes. In the KAZA, their feeding organisations among other factors4 . However, the major 1.5.3. National Level grounds and migration routes are increasingly decreasing in drawback has been the increase in conflict incidences. The translation into action of regional protocols on wildlife in Angola, Botswana, Namibia, Zambia and Zimbabwe has in size and quality by development and human settlements. The general sought to address wider governance issue of growing national economies. The local communities are involved in conversion of natural forests to farmlands has contributed to << Climatic factors tourism ventures and the enfranchisement and empowerment of historically excluded poor rural communities living in or near the loss of wildlife habitat and the lack of integrated land-use Although not often mentioned, perhaps because people wildlife sanctuaries where HWC is endemic. A section in the situational analysis of each partner country explains the national planning which leads to forest fragmentation aggravates the cannot control them, climatic trends are an important policies with a bearing on HWC. situation. This fragmentation of wildlife habitat results in cause of HWC. Studies have shown that seasonal changes pocketed herds/prides/packs, which may have to depend in rainfall correlates directly with HEC intensity in Kenya as on crop raiding and or livestock destruction for survival. If, well as Zimbabwe. The same trend is also noted in Botswa- as often happens, forest fragmentation continues in an area, na where a significant increase in conflict incidences during resident wildlife particularly elephants become squeezed drought years particularly in the Chobe and Okavango Delta into an ever decreasing forest patch, thereby increasing their (D.G. Ecological Services 2003). density beyond the carrying capacity and placing a strain on the available resources. Ferguson & Hanks (2010) outline the Stochastic (sporadic) events such as fire events are difficult roll fencing has had in habitat fragmentation and the to forecast and prevent, yet also have an impact on HWCs. continuing role fences have in driving conflict across the Recent flooding of the Okavango River and subsequently the region. delta and the Makgadikgadi plains has led to a shift or

4 Such as immigration from neighboring countries 5 http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/13/world/a-hunting-ban-saps-a-villages-livelihood.html?_r=0 .

6 A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. 7 KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures

2. Methodology Used in this Consultancy

In reviewing and analysing the HWCs in the KAZA TFCA, we used several methods. These include literature review and consultation with stakeholders. A number of field surveys were also undertaken. The field surveys were not extensive due to limited time as we interviewed field staff, local leadership, KAZA Liaison Officers (KLOs), Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) who are active practitioners in HWC mitigation projects and some experts in different fields related to HWC to explain status of conflict in different areas.

The information gathering exercise employed a multi-sectoral approach of data collection. Both primary and secondary sources of data were in use while collecting the data from the relevant sources and stakeholders including interviews with respective government wildlife authorities, field reports, unpublished reports, published papers, books and other relevant reports. Where applicable, Geographic Information System (GIS) tools completed the identification of conflict hotspots in the region.

Figure 2: Types of HEC in the eastern panhandle and their drivers, identified at local, national and international levels. Driver intra (driver-driver) and inter-relationships (driver-HEC type) are illustrated using arrows.

8 A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. 9 KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures

3. Situational Analysis

We explored the status of HWC in the partner countries and a brief illustration of the situational analysis findings are tabulated in Table 2 below. Appendix 3 details in full the HWC situational analysis of each partner country where the nature and type of conflict, the causes of conflict, past and current mitigation measures are described and explained in detail.

10 A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. 11 KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures

Table 1: HWC status in each partner country.

Country Types and nature of Past conflict Current conflict Country Types and nature of Past conflict Current conflict Applicable policy Applicable policy Causes of conflict conflict mitigation measures mitigation measures Causes of conflict conflict mitigation measures mitigation measures

Angola Zambia

<< Elephants moving into Angola << Crop damage << Traditional methods << Traditional methods e.g. fire, << Angolan Constitutional << Occupation of corridors, << Crop damage. << Predominantly lethal << Effective planning in some << Ostrich Export from neighbouring countries << Attack on livestock noise making Law (No. 23/92 of << Scattered agricultural lands, << Livestock killing and control that includes: areas. Prohibition, i.e. Zambia, Namibia as well (cattle), September 1992) << Living in WMAs and adjacent maiming. << Old firearms << Implementation of an Chapter 115 of the as Botswana. << Human deaths and << Environmental to PA boundaries, << Damage to property << Toxicants integrated national policy on Laws came into force << Human encroachment. injuries Framework Act (No. << Herding livestock too close both rural and urban. << Steel leg hold traps wildlife (on going). on 16 March 1912 << Subsistence agriculture along << Damage of food 5/98 of 19 June 1999. to WMAs, corridor and PA << Direct and perceived << Traditional methods << Securing key and sensitive << Plumage Birds the main river. stores boundaries, attacks on persons. wildlife areas such as corridors Protection, Chapter << Lack of defence of crops and << Commuting between villages << Challenges on game and core habitats. 117 of the Laws came livestock by farmers. at night, fences surrounding << No direct compensation into force on 27 << Lack of proper land tenure << Poor understanding of animal some wildlife enter- offered however, communities November 1915 and planning. behaviour, prises living in hot spots living in and << National Parks and << Human population rising at << Understanding how animals against Wildlife Act an annual rate of close to 4%. approach or avoid human set- << Setting up of individual Chapter 316 << A limited recent experience tlement, crops and livestock, defendable clusters of fields of ‘living with wildlife’ and both during the day and at << Training of communities, and possibly a growing elephant night, trialling of plots with low-tech density in the area << Desire for game meat. mitigation methods << Exclusion fences. Botswana << Independent electrical poly wire with reflective streamers << Human population growth << Crop raiding << Traditional methods << Securing key and sensitive << Wildlife Conservation << Niteguard™ LED lighting << Land-use transformation << Livestock Lethal control by PAC wildlife areas such as corridors Policy system. << Habitat loss, degradation and depredations units << Guarding << Wildlife Conservation << Chilli growing fragmentation << Spreading of foot and << Land-use planning scale and National Parks << Chilli grease << Growing elephant population mouth disease from << Provision of alternative water Act and Associated << Burning chilli bricks << Growing interest in buffalo to cattle points for both communities/ Regulations << Dogs to warn of intended ecotourism << Wildlife and human livestock challenges << Increasing livestock injuries and deaths << Fences << Explosive bangers and sound populations << Repellence options such as horns << Climatic factors and stochastic chilli peppers << Destruction of specific (e.g. flooding) events << Beehives dangerous animals

Namibia Zimbabwe << Parks and Wildlife Act << Settlement of wildlife << Crop damage << Predominantly lethal << Land-use planning. << Human wildlife << Poor implementation of land- << Crop damage << Most problem << Exclusion fences (Chapter 20:14); corridors << Livestock predation control using legal << Implementation of an conflict policy use plans << Livestock killing and animals were << Fences traditional and << Draft Wildlife-Based << Scattered agricultural lands << Damage to property and illegal means. integrated national policy on << Occupation of corridors, maiming removed when they commercial << Land Reform Policy that are impractical to defend, e.g. fences << Toxicants. wildlife. scattered lands, << Damage to property came into conflict << Electric offsets/hotwire of 2004 << Living in and adjacent to PA << Direct and perceived << Steel leg hold traps. << Development of conservancies << Living in and adjacent to PA both rural and urban with people << Repellence options << Environmental boundaries attacks on persons << Direct hunting by that help to offset the costs of boundaries << Direct and perceived << Traditional methods << Lion minding Management Act << Herding livestock within or << Conflict at water MET or commercial living alongside PAs. << Herding livestock within or attacks on persons << Predominantly lethal << Limited lethal control (Chapter 20:27); too close to PA points and riverbanks operators. << Securing key and sensitive too close to PA boundaries control used << Baboon toxicant control << Rural District Councils << Commuting between villages, << Other traditional wildlife areas. << Commuting between villages included: << PAC hunting Act (Chapter 29:13); << Poor understanding of animal methods << Set up of defendable clusters at night << Toxicants << Destruction of specific danger- behaviour by local people of fields. << Poor understanding of animal << Steel leg hold traps ous animals << Fishing and wild products << Training of communities of behaviour by some local << Direct hunting or harvesting new mitigation methods. residents lethal removal. << Access to water by animals/ << Providing alternative water << Feeding of animals in areas wild and domestic, points for both communities/ where there are many tourists << Molapo farming (ploughing livestock. << Change in management in along a river flood plain). << Exclusion fences Botswana (Closing of elephant << Chemical repellent options1. hunting) << Chilli growing, chilli grease, burning chilli bricks. (Footnotes) << Guarding 1 Tests have been conducted with HATE 4-C and Capsicum oleo-resin << Good crop minding. << Translocation << Limited lethal control. << PAC/trophy hunting practiced

12 A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. 13 KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures © P Sutera

4. Mitigation Measures Commonly Used Across the Partner Countries 4.1. Introduction This assessment is of the various combinations of mitigation measures currently used in one or more countries in the KAZA TFCA and their success depends on a number of environmental factors as well as social and economic variables. HWC mitigation measures across KAZA partner Countries can be categorised into two categories, which are traditional deterrents and modern deterrents. © Honeyguide Tanzania http://www.honeyguide.org

14 A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. 15 KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures

4.2. Traditional Deterrents body of anecdotal evidence to suggest that elephants system. As wildlife, particularly elephants and antelopes barriers. In deterring predators from livestock, fortified habituate to gunshots if exposed to them for a prolonged attempt to enter a field, they disturb a string thus making the enclosures that do not allow wildlife from seeing the livestock ‘Traditional’ deterrents are those that generally utilise low- period. Transport and logistical problems are the major bells ring both alerting farmers to the elephant’s presence and have proven to be effective, as wild animals do not attack tech materials that are widely available. Rural communities drawbacks. scaring a crop-raiding animal. what they cannot see. living alongside wildlife devised most of these techniques. Shooting Problem Wildlife << Electric sirens Noise In Namibia, researchers tested a system that triggers a siren Barrier Vegetation Wildlife managers consider the killing of problem wildlife a << Unpalatable cash crops The most common way that farmers attempt to chase wildlife when elephants made contact with the trip wire. They last resort. The practice has been in use across Africa for the One can reduce the attractiveness of cultivated areas by out of fields and human settlement is by shouting and banging reported some success (O’Connell 1995). In Sri Lanka, past 100 years. All countries engage in some lethal control of planting unpalatable crops in vulnerable areas, e.g. on farms metal objects to make loud noises. Farmers use a range of researchers have found similar success with such methods. animals identified and deemed problematic. at the edges of protected areas. Crops may include chilli, tea, noisemakers, such as beating drums and tins, ‘cracking’ However, the limitations are that in high rainfall conditions, ginger or oilseed. These unpalatable crops may not deter some whips and yelling and whistling. However, crop raiding and it is difficult to maintain electrical systems and they are Shooting a problem animal such as an elephant while it is animals, but they can reduce the threat to a farmer’s livelihood livestock depredating animals tend to habituate very quickly vulnerable to theft. crop raiding has been considered the best way to ‘teach’ security by providing a valuable crop that the animals will not to this deterrent. the other elephants to stay away from crops. To appease the eat. local people and to compensate for their crop losses, there is Alarms can play a critical role in crop protection as they offer Missiles distribution of meat from the killed problem animal among security to the farmers. In Zimbabwe (Museruka village in Mbire District), farmers found them to be critical to field << Buffer zones Farmers may throw rocks, burning sticks and occasionally, that community. Most wildlife managers feel that this method guarding as: a) they always knew when the elephants were The ‘hard edge’ boundaries of dense human settlements spears at crop-raiding animals and livestock depredating is generally of little long-term effect and is a waste of approaching; and, b) the bells sometimes drove the elephants abutting a protected area tend to be areas of high conflict carnivores. This usually involves getting close to the animals, valuable resources. In many situations, the animal responsible away. Many farmers complained that it was exhausting between wild animals and people. Numerous park planners and therefore the level of danger to the farmer is high and for the majority of the damage is not identifiable, and the PAC guarding the fields all night and it was impossible to maintain have suggested the creation of a buffer zone around protected usually the effect is short lived. units end up killing a token animal. Besides being a waste of areas where human influence is limited, thus relieving the a valuable resource, this type of solution does little to deter constant vigilance. Alarm systems were highly regarded in some communities in Zimbabwe because they allowed pressure on both the protected area and the surrounding Fire other crop-raiders (Osborn, 1998). Often the reaction of the human population. targeted problem animal is merely to change areas of raiding farmers to sleep whilst maintaining a level of vigilance. Farmers may burn plastic and rubber to create a noxious rather than to stop crop-raiding altogether. smoke on field boundaries and will often leave fires burning Concerning elephants, the purpose of a buffer is to create a all night even if they are not present in the fields. In some Barrier Systems zone of reduced attractiveness between the protected area cases, they carry the fire in the form of burning sticks around 4.3. Modern Deterrents Barriers work on the principle of excluding wildlife from crops and the surrounding crops (Thouless 1994). This involves fields or livestock enclosures. While widely utilized, this Vigilance and Co-operation by Farmers and livestock. A wide range of potential methods exists. clearing secondary forest on the boundary and creating some method often cause widespread increased deforestation in Farmers who sleep at their fields lose fewer crops than those physical distance between the boundary and cultivation. There many areas. who do not because they can react when an animal << Bamboo spikes is, however, no evidence that such boundaries make a approaches (Smith and Kasiki, 2000). For example, Lahm Short lengths of bamboo with sharpened ends laid into the difference to elephant movements as the elephants can just Simple Fences (1996) found that 36% of farmers in Gabon experiencing crop ground so that the spike protrudes vertically from the soil. pass through them to the cultivation. Spikes must be positioned close together and in a wide band Simple fences are made of any material that famers might destruction by elephants did nothing to deter them. Osborn so that the raiding animal can neither step between the spikes, have on hand. They include branches, rough-cut poles, wire (1998) found that 85% of damage incidents occurred in Fencing Options nor step over the entire barrier. Elephants and in some cases strands and mesh. These have historically provided some undefended fields. Currently, guarding of fields and livestock << Non-electric fencing buffalo will not tread on the spikes, as they require a large protection from raiding animals, but generally, they provide is taking different forms such as the lion guardians in Kenya Strong, non-electrified fences are in use (some successfully) to surface area to distribute their weight. In areas where bamboo little protection against such animal attacks. and long shields lion guardians (run by Hwange lion research) restrict wildlife movements in many parts of Africa and Asia. in Zimbabwe defending people and livestock from predators. is readily available this method would be cost-effective, but These fences, built with wooden or steel poles driven vertically the limitations would be the labour and time involved in the into the ground some with heavy gauge wire or cable strung Visual Deterrents If farmers can co-operate by a system of rotating ‘guard duty’ construction and maintenance. between the poles and drawn tight, are showing various levels Brightly coloured cloths, sun reflecting silver metal sheets whereby only a few farmers patrol during the night and when of effectiveness. While these fences have met with some and plastic hanging on simple fences at the edges of fields or wildlife is sighted; other farmers are woken up to chase the << Sharp stones success, they can be expensive to erect and maintain. livestock enclosures. Such visual deterrents may have an initial animals away. Watchtowers that provide good vantage points, A barrier of sharp stones laid out in a broad band in the ‘scaring’ value, but this method does not provide any reliable built around fields of crops or near livestock kraals, increase same manner as the bamboo spikes (above). The method is << Electric fencing protection. Traditional deterrents tend to become ineffective the farmers’ chances of their being alerted to the presence time-consuming and labour intensive, but ultimately cheap Electric fences come in a variety of designs and used to protect over time, as lions, elephants and baboons habituate to these of potentially harmful wildlife before damage has occurred. and low maintenance. It would require access to a large small farms, enclose entire wildlife reserves, or deflect animals ‘empty threats’ once they are repeatedly exposed to them Simple alarm systems, using string and cowbells or tins, can number of suitable stones. away from specific areas. Elephant fences are usually high- (Osborn & Parker, 2003). Usually a community will rely upon also be effective and avoid the farmer having to be alert all voltage and may incorporate a number of design features, such just a few methods, and these tend to be in use repeatedly night long. << Other barriers as extra pole wires, to protect them from elephant attacks. with little variation. Across Africa and Asia, farmers attempt to construct barriers Elephants are notorious at seeking out the weak points of Alarm Systems around their fields and homesteads to deter elephants, hyenas fences. Thouless and Sakwa (1995) concluded that elephants Disturbance Shooting and lions. One of the most common barrier materials is thorn could overcome most modifications in time, meaning that a Alarm systems are acoustic devices that are set at the boundary branches. Piling logs and sticks around the edges of fields or Disturbance shooting is the firing of gunshots over the heads fence’s effectiveness does not depend on entirely on design, of the farms or kraals and triggered off by a tripwire. Their kraals is common in the KAZA area. In some areas, farmers of crop raiding or livestock depredating animals. Mainly construction and voltage alone. primary goal is to alert farmers to the presence of wildlife, but may simply run bark ropes from tree to tree and hang pieces Government Agencies (centralised units) use this method and they also have some deterrent effect. of white cloth from the line. None of these barriers can stop it is in use across the continent. Disturbance shooting has The materials, installation and maintenance costs can usually a determined elephant or lion but any boundary creates a been a long-standing deterrent. However, it is at best make electric fencing impractical for applications in poorer << Bells psychological barrier that can have some impact. The most considered a temporary respite from problem animals developing countries unless funded by international aid In Zimbabwe, cowbells strung along a simple string fence at important aspect is the availability of the materials to build the particularly lions, baboons and elephants. There is a large the edge of vulnerable fields or kraals work as an alarm agencies. However, there has been an enormous

16 A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. 17 KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures

improvement in fence designs with a marked reduction in Fences around parks or reserves tend to give poor results. It is cost such that some of these methods are appropriate in the better to fence in grazing lands, fields and or kraals. However, so-called poorer communities. In addition, equipment such fencing projects may fail because of repeated damage from as solar panels, energisers, batteries and wire are all desirable elephants. materials accessed at relatively low prices although there < might be a high risk of theft. In Muzarabani District, < Single-strand fencing © P Sutera Zimbabwe, a game fence along the edge of Mavuradona Electric fencing can be adapted to rural conditions by cutting Wilderness Area had solar panels and batteries stolen no less down on building costs and materials. For example, it is than 3 times in 2 years rendering the project ineffective. possible to construct a fence with just a single live strand and 5. Cost Benefit Analysis of Mitigation Measures Used Across hang it from bush poles instead of metal stanchions. This cuts A key factor determining the success of a fence is ownership. costs considerably, but there is still a need for insulators, solar KAZA TFCA. A fence that is constructed and maintained by a government panels and batteries, all of which are high value items at risk agency such as the Wildlife Division may invoke a perception from theft. that it is a government fence. The community is likely to leave We divided our review of mitigation measures into five parts. First is Efficacy that maintenance to the government and the community will take The limitation of barriers is that they are generally expensive little or no responsibility. Rarely does a government agency to construct, is labour intensive and has high levels of is the ability to produce a desired or intended result. Second is Efficiency the state have the resources to maintain a fence year after year, and maintenance. In addition, much anecdotal evidence suggests or quality of being efficient. Sustainability is a measure of the chances for inevitably, the fence deteriorates. However, if the community that elephants will overcome even the most sophisticated builds a fence (with the cost of materials subsidised by a barriers over time. In addition, permanent barriers may not be methods to continue after introduction. Adaptability between locations and donor agency), and the community is responsible for its popular with farmers as they can restrict agricultural upkeep, then success will be more likely, because local expansion. species of each method and Replicability or the ability to have the same system or people have a stake in its success. method copied to another location.

18 A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. 19 KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures

5.1. Low-Tech Traditional Tools Mitigation Measures Mitigation measure: Mitigation measure: Mitigation measure: low-tech traditional tools – use of fire. low-tech traditional tools – use of low-tech traditional tools – strategic In the section below, we compare low-technology tools, such as noisemakers and vigilance, to high-tech fencing and << Efficacy: widespread use in KAZA surveillance measures (famers placement of watchtowers. surveillance. In many cases, the success of any combination of methods is due to an interaction between two techniques, such TFCA fundamental as a base line guarding fields or kraals). In Zimbabwe and Zambia, either as good crop minding by a farmer and use quick use of loud noisemakers. In addition, many of the animals a farmer may need approach. << Efficacy: widespread use in all farmers build watchtowers that are in to repel may respond to one mitigation technique and not another making it difficult to generalise with any precision. << Efficiency: variable depending on partner countries fundamental as a a tree or freestanding from which they Mitigation measure: Mitigation measure: Mitigation measure: farmer effort and level of crop base line approach. can observe their fields at night and be low-tech traditional tools that includes low-tech traditional tools of which low-tech traditional tools that includes minding – very good when << Efficiency: extremely variable safe. banging of tins, stock whips, shouting ‘good crop minding’ provides the traditional fencing. combined with other tools depending on individual << Efficacy: not as widespread every- and good surveillance (sleeping in corner stone to effectively mitigate << Efficacy: widespread use in KAZA demonstrating motivation and farmer effort and good crop minding where in all member countries but is fields) by farmers or livestock HWC in crops. TFCA fundamental as a base line inventiveness. dwelling the land – very good, when effective when properly minders. << Efficacy: possibly the most important approach to provide the first line of << Sustainability: dependent on farmer combined with other means of sur- implemented. << Efficacy: the ability of traditional aspect of crop or livestock defence to protect crops. effort, improved considerably by veillance and tools demonstrating << Efficiency: extremely variable methods to produce the desired protection. The most abused, << Efficiency: wide ranging, medium to training in particular understanding motivation and inventiveness. depending on farmer effort and result is low and is the source of misunderstood mitigation principle high, depending on effort animal behaviour. << Sustainability: dependent on farmer good crop minding dwelling the much of the frustration by rural practised, althoughwidely known by undertaken and structure of the << Adaptability: quickly adapted for effort improved considerably by land – very good when fully people in the KAZA. all member countries fundamental fence provided. each household and situation. training in particular understanding occupied during vulnerable periods << Efficiency: medium to low to effectively mitigation. Upon it, << Sustainability: is dependent on Innovative improvements animal behaviour and individual combined with other means of depending on effort placed crop every other approach and tool is farmer siting the fence well and recorded include burning farmer motivation. surveillance and tools demonstrating minding– good when combined built-on. maintenance effort. Improved embers in tins tossed toward << Adaptability: quickly adapted for motivation and inventiveness. with other tools demonstrating << Efficiency: excellent to none considerably by training in elephant and predators. cropped lands and kraal situations. << Sustainability: dependent on farmer motivation and inventiveness. depending solely on effort and particular by understanding animal << Replicability: cheap easy to r << Replicability: cheap easy to effort improved considerably by << Sustainability: dependent on farmer individual/community behaviour. eplicate. replicate. training in particular understanding effort, improved considerably by motivation and dwelling in the << Adaptability: easily built from any animal behaviour and individual training, in particular by cropped land – very good when material i.e. the cheapest and most farmer motivation. understanding animal behaviour. combined with other tools available to hand. Improved barrier << Adaptability: quickly adapted for << Adaptability: quickly adapted for demonstrating inventiveness and enabling the attachment of an cropped lands and kraal each household and situation. improved strategy. electrical offset or other situations. << Replicability: easy to replicate. << Sustainability: dependant on farmer sophisticated alerting and or << Replicability: cheap easy to effort, improved considerably by repellence tools. replicate by farmers. training in particular by << Replicability: easy to replicate for all understanding animal behaviour. crops. << Adaptability: quickly adapted for any crop situation. << Replicability: cheap very easy to replicate.

20 A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. 21 KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures

Mitigation measure: Mitigation measure: Mitigation measure: Mitigation measure: low-tech traditional tools that includes homemade low-tech traditional tools that includes various types of low-tech traditional tools that includes good kraal structure low-tech traditional tools of which ‘good livestock minding’ bangers, firecrackers, carbide bangers, chilli exploders, lanterns and torches. and applying good kraaling techniques. provides the cornerstone for mitigation of livestock HWC. other explosive canisters and shooting in the air (see full << Efficacy: widespread use in all member countries << Efficacy: widespread use in all member countries << Efficacy: possibly the most important tool of the toolkit. list of traditional repellence tools). fundamental to mitigate HWC. Light emitting diode (LED) fundamentalas a base line approach to provide the first The most abused, misunderstood mitigation principle << Efficacy: widespread use in all member countries as value torches are brighter, last longer and are much more user line of defence to protect livestock. practised, although widely known by all member adding tools to boost the traditional fence. friendly and durable compared the older generation << Efficiency:wide-ranging medium to high depending on countries fundamental for effective mitigation. Every other << Efficiency: high depending on effort placed and good crop torches. effort undertaken and stature of the fence provided. approach may revolve around it. minding dwelling the land – very good when combined << Efficiency: medium to low depending on effort placed and << Sustainability: dependent on farmer maintenance effort << Efficiency: variable depending solely on effort and with other tools demonstrating motivation and good crop minding dwelling the land – very good when improved considerably by training in particular individual/community motivation remaining vigilant at all inventiveness. combined with other tools demonstrating motivation and understanding animal behaviour and the kraal times, proper herding using well-constructed kraals – very << Sustainability: dependent on farmer effort improved inventiveness. standard required. good, when combined with other tools demonstrating considerably by training in particular understanding << Sustainability: dependant on farmer effort improved << Adaptability: can be built from any material, the cheapest inventiveness and improved strategy. animal behaviour. considerably by training in particular understanding and most available to hand, enabling the attachment of << Sustainability: dependant on farmer effort. << Adaptability: quickly adapted for cropped lands and kraal animal behaviour. an electrical offset or other sophisticated alerting and or Improved considerably by training, in particular with an situations. << Adaptability: quickly adapted for cropped lands and kraal repellence tools. understanding of carnivore behaviour. << Replicability: easy to replicate with training. situations. << Replicability: easy to replicate for all livestock. << Adaptability: quickly adapted for any livestock situation. << Replicability: easy to replicate improved with training. << Replicability: cheap and very easy to replicate.

22 A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. 23 KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures

5.2. MediumTech, Semi-Sophisticated Tools Mitigation Measures Mitigation measure: Mitigation measure: medium tech traditional tools that moderate tech solutions and tools – mitigating the chilli option – passive Mitigation measure: medium tech semi-sophisticated tools that includes various types of noise and sight tools used in includes various types of offset or applications (see main tools for details) to repel animals from crops and combination with other tools that includes vuvuzelas6, football whistles, bear bangers, flares and commercial Taser units. polywire electric wires. livestock kraals. << Efficacy: less widespread but used << Efficacy: Well known throughout the KAZA region (although not used Mitigation measure: Mitigation measure: in all member countries where it is everywhere in all the member countries) that is effective when properly medium tech semi-sophisticated moderate tech solutions and tools – mitigating the chilli option – passive more effective when added to a fence implemented around the edges of lands against the traditional fence. Its specialist tool to provide green laser applications (see main tools for details) to repel animals from crops and (traditional or commercial) rather than effectiveness enhanced when used as a package alongside the different chilli therapy specifically for baboon and livestock kraals. on its own. guns. directing animals away from << Efficacy: well known throughout the KAZA region (although not used every- << Efficiency: extremely efficient provided << Efficiency: extremely variable depending on farmer effort and good crop specific places. where in all the member countries) that is effective when properly it is well maintained depending on minding dwelling the land – requires diligent application during vulnerable << Efficacy: new technique still under implemented around the edges of lands against the traditional fence. Its effort placed and good crop minding periods combining well with other surveillance and repellence tools experimentation in Zimbabwe. effectiveness enhanced when used as a package alongside the different chilli dwelling the land – very good when demonstrating motivation and inventiveness. << Efficiency: effective with little training guns. combined with other tools << Sustainability: dependent on farmer effort improved considerably by training to repel baboons from their night << Efficiency: extremely variable depending on farmer effort and good crop demonstrating motivation and in particular understanding animal behaviour and the chilli strategies required. roosts and growing in use by the minding dwelling the land – requires diligent application during vulnerable inventiveness. Easily replicable once respective communities gain the knowledge and without hunting fraternity to redirect periods combining well with other surveillance and repellence tools << Sustainability: ranging from much cost. individual animals. demonstrating motivation and inventiveness. relatively cheap (polywire to cover << Adaptability: It adds value to tool effectiveness: << Sustainability: dependant on farmer << Sustainability: dependent on farmer effort improved considerably by training 5km ≤ USD 1000 complete with <

24 A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. 25 KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures

Mitigation measure: Mitigation measure: Mitigation measure: Mitigation measure: moderate tech solutions and tools – mitigating the chilli option – active medium tech sophisticated tools to medium to hi tech bee fencing. moderate tech solutions and tools – mitigating the chilli option – active applications that include the different types of chilli guns to repel animals from combine that includes the Niteguard << Efficacy: concept hugely attractive to applications employing the Mhiripiribomba in the Chirundu border town in crops and livestock kraals. and PREDeter LED deterrents various conservation groups and well Zimbabwe. << Efficacy: relatively new concept that has taken time for acceptance but that has << Efficacy: relatively new concept used funded by development NGOs that << Efficacy: relatively new concept that has taken time for acceptance but that has indicated promising results in Chirundu and Victoria Falls in Zimbabwe, South presently only in Namibia, Zimbabwe seek to find a biological way of indicated promising and effective results in Chirundu. The Chirundu Elephant Luangwa Zambia and in Niassa, Mozambique. The system requires diligent and and Zambia. mitigating conflict and provide a Management Program comprising of Zimbabwe Parks and Wildlife Authority, persistent doggedness to effect lasting results. It is very effective on cow groups << Efficiency: set at the appropriate win-win situation for both Jeche Fishing Camp and the Chirundu District Council provided diligent and and new problematic bulls often only requiring a single treatment to them but carnivore height at 7 metres intervals conservation and communities. Still persistent doggedness to effect lasting results. It is very effective on cow groups strongly habituated bulls require a lot more effort. With persistence however has proven extremely effective. under trials to test its efficacy in the and new problematic bulls often only requiring a single treatment to them but even these individuals are effectively repelled from lands and do not return. << Sustainability: increased KAZA. strongly habituated bulls required a lot more effort. With persistence however The Mhiripiribomba chilli gun is the only active tool apart from lethal control effectiveness dependent on kraal de- << Efficiency: still need further trials to even, these individuals were effectively repelled from the town boundary and that will finally stop persistent habituated bulls. Although a freestanding tool sign and construction preventing the prove its effectiveness and cost have not returned. The program has been running now for a year, with chilli works well in combination with other tools defending a traditional or carnivores from seeing what is inside effectiveness. balls fired some 770 times through two chilli guns before requiring commercial fence or barrier, its effectiveness greatly enhanced when used as a the kraal. Improved << Sustainability: tried in all KAZA refurbishment. package alongside other mitigating tools. The Ambush Chilli Educator (ACE) is considerably by on-going training countries except possibly Angola, the << Efficiency: the efficiency of the Chirundu example is arguable due to the tireless still under trial, defending approach paths to crops. in particular understanding animal main problem being occupation of effort undertaken by the project manager reacting daily to phone in requests to << Efficiency:variable depending on farmer effort and good crop minding dwelling behaviour and the kraal standard the respective hives particularly in hot chase the elephants beyond the town edge and the virtual fence8 established, the land – requires diligent application during vulnerable periods combining required. dry areas. Where conditions for demonstrating good crop/town mindedness that has proved to be the secret well with other surveillance and repellence tools. << Adaptability: is relatively expensive beekeeping are ideal, the method is for success. Perhaps the most remarkable achievement in Chirundu was the << Sustainability: requires specific training of designated community scouts, and less effective set on crop fencing highly sustainable. change in attitude by local inhabitants of the uncontrolled rubbish thrown out persons familiar and confident to approach elephant with an understanding of but worth the while set on kraal walls << Adaptability: with proper training and previously attracting elephants and habituating them. animal behaviour and the chilli strategies. The guns cost USD 170 and the chilli combining well with other tools such or a tradition of bee keeping it may << Sustainability: in Chirundu, the chilli guns are in use as stand-alone tools that oil is easy to produce. as the attachment of an electrical easily be adapted. would be even more effective combined with other tools. The program << Adaptability: with proper training, all communities can become proficient using offset or other sophisticated alerting << Replicability: highly replicable in providing specific training of Zimbabwe Park Rangers, persons familiar and this technique. and/ or repellence tool options. places with proper bee keeping confident to approach elephant with an understanding of animal behaviour and << Replicability: cheap and easy to replicate by farmers. << Replicability: easy to replicate for all conditions and might be worth trying. the chilli strategies. livestock kraals. << Adaptability: with proper training all communities can become proficient using this technique << Replicability: cheap and easy to replicate anywhere provided there are persons that would be willing to implement it over time

8 The concept of the Virtual Fence/Memory Fence definition on page 25

26 A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. 27 KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures

Mitigation measure: Mitigation measure: 5.3. High Tech Mitigation Measures Mitigation measure: medium to hi tech lethal control option considering the hunting of individual medium tech wire crocodile fencing high tech specialist tools to capture Mitigation measure: animals << Efficacy: relatively new concept used and translocate problem animals that high tech commercial fencing commonly used for game parks and large << Efficacy: is target specific and extremely effective when correctly administered. presently mainly in Namibia. includes both physical and chemical wildlife areas. Used extensively in all five KAZA TFCA countries, as the only effective way of << Efficiency: effectively set it cuts off capture methods. << Efficacy: immediately effectively repelling all animals when working well. dealing with a specific rampaging or wounded animal. It effectively promotes any possible access by crocodiles and << Efficacy: advanced technology However extremely expensive so exclusively used for high value commercial the boundary dynamic or virtual fence where identification and killing of the efficiently reduces crocodile attacks. developed enabling the safe enterprises found in all member countries except perhaps Angola for culprit animal occurs in the field or at the boundary. In the early years, hunting << Sustainability: reliant upon the capture and movement of all wildlife containing and/or excluding wildlife. Of all systems, properly enforced it of problem animals was common across the region targeting all species water level remaining reasonably species. Capture takes place in all dramatically implements the memory dynamic providing an effective virtual including antelope and crocodile. Much more recently just before the turn of constant. Requires rearranging where member countries including Angola, fence thereafter even within wildlife corridors but takes more time. For this the century, this practice became unacceptable and newer more water levels fluctuate enough to with the use of contracting qualified reason, fences of this stature require careful forethought, wildlife movement conservation friendly options that included translocation and repellence submerge the leading edges needing teams from Zimbabwe and South knowledge and planning before implementation, considering long-term replaced this tool. Nevertheless, this option still provides an important tool as a meaningful community participation Africa. Zambia and Botswana largely ramifications to wildlife movement and wellbeing. Historically these backup for extreme situations. Interestingly the Mhiripiribomba closely mimics to ensure its proper function. provide their own teams except fences mostly were ill planned and occasionally politically motivated, adversely a rifle in many ways, effectively replacing its function without destroying the << Adaptability: is relatively for major operations. Capture and effecting wildlife movement patterns. Completely enclosing an area provides a offending animal. inexpensive and can be adapted to translocation require a high level closed ecosystem that will require careful monitoring by ecologists and timely << Efficiency: used sparingly only when necessary hunting is a very efficient tool. most large river, pool, lake or dam of knowledge, skill and equipment management to sustain it. Provided it is properly maintained and enforced, << Sustainability: widely practiced and unsustainable. situations. determining capture success that may effectively minimising challenges that will occur, a virtual fence provided << Adaptability: effective in any situation provided administered by a qualified << Replicability: easy to replicate range from complete disaster to total outside an active corridor will be established within 2-5 years whereupon even expert. provided sufficient instruction. success with less than 2% loss. if the fence is removed the boundary will remain established. For example, << Replicability: parks officials can easily replicate this method augmenting the << Efficiency: largely dependent upon the the electric fence along the boundary of the Malilangwe Private Game Reserve technique by repellence methods to instil discipline through memory. capture unit reputation, with in Zimbabwe is a 52km enclosed fence. Unfortunately, this fence does cut experienced teams providing total through an active elephant corridor thus making it more difficult to maintain capture and translocation success. as elephants are constantly challenging it at great expense to the owners. It is << Sustainability: the more reputable interesting that countries to the north in Central Africa, except possibly Kenya, units although expensive, they discourage large scale fencing projects preferring to work around corridors find- consistently produce the desired ing a workable compromise with communities. Namibia seems to have struck a results. workable balance for fenced areas that considers both wildlife and << Adaptability: most reputable units are communities. See Ferguson & Hanks (2010). able to operate anywhere under all << Efficiency: completely dependent upon finance and individual farmer/ conditions throughout the KAZA sub community effort. Despite the Malilangwe standard, cutting down the yearly region. elephant breakouts and break-ins from 300 to 30 a year, (interestingly mostly << Replicability: requires specific training the same individuals) elephant still breaks it probably driven by the fact it does and years of working alongside close off a major corridor accessing Gonerezhou National Park, requiring other experienced operators to gain options as reinforcement. sufficient experience to cope << Costing: considering costing USD 16 000/km the Malilangwe fence costs a independently. further USD 432/km to maintain it including twice spraying with herbicide during the wet season to prevent vegetation growth shorting out the system. << Sustainability: to sustain this standard of fencing requires high care management each day, each scout patrolling 7-8km of fence testing voltage output, ensuring that it remains above 5000 volts preferably around 7000, maintenance crews reacting immediately it drops. Using the Malilangwe model even less ambitious fences still depend on farmer effort and sufficient funding to police and maintain it. << Adaptability: politically many communities see this scale of fencing as a direct challenge to their rite of passage and benefits accrued from living adjacent to PAs requiring innovative benefit sharing to improve their perception. << Replicability: Not easy to replicate for communities even with training requiring innovative individual and community benefit programs to convince them.

28 A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. 29 KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures

Mitigation measure: Mitigation measure: 5.4. Species-Specific Mitigation Measures-Livestock Depredation hi tech lethal control option lethal control using toxicants high tech capture and translocation employing various Mitigation measure: Specialist measures principally designed to protect specific target carnivores, mostly NGO driven, (MOSTLY BABOONS) cage and camp traps. that help to reduce conflict to communities. << Efficacy: in the last ten years, Papiol was the only toxicant << Efficacy: traps largely employed for the capture, still administered for the control of baboon populations in translocation and destruction of specific problem animals 1. Cheetah. 2. Lion Zimbabwe. (Mike Le Grange Pers. comm.) Although target rather than general capture discussed above. Successful << Efficacy: almost exclusive to Namibia << Efficacy: mostly administered by specific and very effective in reducing baboon populations strategies and traps specifically designed and developed but also tried in Botswana largely various lion NGOs protection groups 3. Wild Dog (Painted hunting dog). quickly, subsequent management failed to be ‘in house’ to solve a specific problem drawn from involving the larger conservancies such as the Lion Guardian Project << Efficacy: practised where wild dog implemented to remove the drivers that caused the considerable field experience now replicated throughout that provides for innovative planning and the Hwange Lion Project occur in conservancies and population increase in the first instance resulting in the KAZA, but more often practiced in Namibia, Botswana using holistic solutions to reduce operating in communities respective PAs providing for stalled populations slowly reverting. This inability high- and Zimbabwe. conflict from cheetah. These include surrounding PAs, providing innovative planning using holistic lights the principle: culling of wild animals is ineffective as << Efficiency: dependent on personal knowledge, the use of specialist dogs, donkeys innovative planning using holistic solutions to reduce conflict a method for addressing HWC. experience, usually gained through hands-on training and wildebeest (consult full list solutions to reduce conflict from generally. These mostly include << Efficiency: lethal control whether by hunting or toxicants is requiring innovativeness, motivation and extreme provided). lion generally. These include the use training awareness programs and the only method to remove habituated individuals from a patience. << Efficiency: effective with training and of conditioned taste aversion (CTA), pack monitoring directly and population that occurs with respect to urban baboon << Sustainability: employed by qualified persons provides sufficient motivation. The way to radio telemetry fitted with geo PA through GPS telemetry. populations. For example, urban baboon troops have sustainable results. Best to contract in experienced go forward for the future capitalising boundaries to forewarn << Efficiency:effective with training and crossed the human/wildlife barrier that for the future will individuals to teach correct strategy to new staff. on behavioural traits that provide a concerned communities of sufficient motivation, the way to go result in significant disease cross over and the baboon << Adaptability: can be adapted to most situations by workable compromise for both imminent approach and using a forward for the future capitalising becoming extremely unpleasant to live with. The adverse experienced persons. animal and community. This will Global Positioning System (GPS) to on behavioural traits that provide knowledge urban baboon retain cannot be reversed << Replicability: easy to replicate provided sufficient allow cheetah passage through PAs. quickly locate and remove carcass- a workable compromise for both by re-educating them but by removing all the baboons instruction in the field. << Sustainability: dependant on farmer es outside PAs before they can be animal and community. involved along with the knowledge invested that toxicant << Translocation: not recommended particularly in respect to effort, improved considerably by consumed. << Sustainability: dependant on control can quickly achieve. Thereafter significant changes habituated animals training, in particular understanding << Efficiency: effective with training and community sensitising improved in human carnivore behaviour. sufficient motivation. The way to go considerably by training in particular behaviour that in anyway encourages them needs to be << Adaptability: perhaps more difficult forward for the future capitalising understanding carnivore behaviour. actively discouraged (see control of baboon in particular depending on each situation on the on behavioural traits that provide a May have to consider translocation the point dealing with this) With respect to baboon ground provided there is sufficient workable compromise for both of groups establishing territories problems occurring in communities most often baboon motivation, adequate extension animal and community such as outside PAs and wildlife problems are efficiently solved by community action workers/cheetah minders, cheetah passage through PAs. conservancies in livestock ranches. driving them repeatedly from conflict areas. community buy-in and funding. << Sustainability: dependant on farmer << Adaptability: perhaps more difficult << Sustainability: community action/guarding improves the << Replicability: easy replicated effort, improved considerably by depending on each situation on the sustainability of this technique throughout the KAZA provided communities are properly training in particular understanding ground provided there is sufficient TFCA. sensitised and fully support the carnivore behaviour. motivation, adequate extension << Adaptability: effective in any situation provided concept. << Adaptability: perhaps more difficult workers/wild dog minders, administered by a qualified expert under an appropriate depending on each situation on the community buy in and funding. permit. ground provided there is sufficient << Replicability: easy replicated << Replicability: mostly no longer accepted requiring other motivation, adequate extension provided communities are mass control measures such as the baboon mass cage trap workers/minders, community buy-in properly sensitised and fully support technique. and funding. the concept. << Replicability: not at all sustainable by communities on their own, requiring continual NGO support and funding. Easily replicated provided communities are properly sensitised and fully support the concept.

30 A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. 31 KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures

5.5. Mitigation Measures Developed and Used Outside of the KAZA TFCA.

Mitigation measure: Moderate tech solutions and tools – mitigating the chilli option – active applications employing the Tanzanian motorised approach (see further details under chapter dealing with HWC tools) << Efficacy: relatively new concept that has taken time for acceptance but that has indicated promising and effective results inTanzania in the Kwakuchinja Corridor alongside the Tarangire National Park. The Honeyguide Elephant Management Program comprising of Tanzanian State Parks and Burungwe WMA, financially assisted by Honeyguide provides diligent 6. Recommended hwc Mitigation Tools and persistent doggedness to effect lasting results. It is particularly effective on cow groups that occurred within the corridor. However strongly habituated bulls require considerably more effort. With persistence, even these individuals were effectively repelled from the corridor and moved back to the Park boundary. 6.1. Mitigation Against Crop raiding << Efficiency: the efficiency of this example as indicated in the Chirundu initiative is arguable due to the tireless effort Diligent crop and livestock minding which includes: undertaken by Honeyguide staff reacting nightly to phone in reports, chasing the elephant out beyond the corridor edge << Implementation of a planned strategy and virtual fence established demonstrating good crop mindedness that has proved to be the secret for success. << Incorporating many different tools and constantly trying different combinations << Sustainability: in the Kwakuchinja Corridor, the chilli guns are in use combined with other tools. Furthermore, the program << Synchronising cattle calving down to minimise vulnerable period provides specific training of Burungwe scouts, persons familiar and confident to approach elephant with an understanding << Living in the cropped lands of animal behaviour, the chilli strategies and using the tools outlined to defend individual crops. << Provision of 24/7 crop guards during the vulnerable period << Adaptability: with proper training, all communities can become proficient using this technique. << The implementation of early warning systems that include use of dogs tied up near respective guard posts << Replicability: cheap and easy to replicate anywhere provided there are persons that would be willing to take responsibility << Tins or cow bells interconnected that provide warning when disturbed to implement it over time. << Well placed and manned vantage points to detect early entry and to provide warning to others in the village of possible intrusion from which to provide repellence action << Providing some sort of cleared area forcing the animals to pass though on approach to crops << Commercial fencing including electrification << Offset electrical wires permanently installed << Temporary and movable ‘polywire’ hotwire arrangement or simple 2-strand polywire ‘electronic string’ solar electric fencing

32 A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. 33 KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures

Traditional fencing set in a condom thrown at << Green laser therapy10 for baboons 6.2. Mitigation Against Livestock 6.3. Physical Trapping Options << Pole/bamboo fencing with pole or approaching elephant << High-tech game and predator-proof A Variety of traps for certain problems animals such as; wire fill in << The OLIGHT 96 industrial torch Bonnox11 fencing sporting several Depredation << Crocodile traps << Scrub/bush fencing producing 4000 lumens is electrical offsets << Good livestock minding << Spring leaf trap << Weaved wall fencing particularly effective brightly << Accounting for all stock into the pens each evening << Box trap << Hedges of grown plants illuminating a large area providing Advanced options << Staying away from designated wildlife areas (PAs, WMAs << On land trap << Stone walls direct deterrence particularly in the Use and management of these is by and corridors) << Floating traps strobe mode experienced operators specifically << Properly herded each day << Bush pig camp trap Low tech direct community repellence << Fires licensed and trained to do so << Herded earlier rather than later each day when they are at << Baboon camp trap (people acting on their own initiative) << Burning logs/stumps (In << Digging trenches- best lined (teak less risk from predators << Individual carnivore cage traps that includes: Mozambique the favoured species railway sleepers work well) to << Kraals well placed in respect to security of the village << Specialised capture release/translocation cable leg hold << Shouting, singing and hand involved appears to be Julbenardia prevent refilling of trench. If done << Exposed as much as possible to discourage attack and traps clapping (even talking aloud) paniculata that provides for showers properly trenches can be extremely observe possible approach << Mass capture and darting translocation – specialised << Scarecrows of sparks) effective for elephant and hippo << Early warning systems fitted licenced capture units << Use of tins and drums in various << Fire embers on the ground or but is expensive requiring regular << A fence within a fence approach following living fences formats thrown up maintenance. Most often employed approach in East Africa 6.4. Chemical Capture and << Tins and or cowbells suspended on << Vuvuzelas for smaller high profile projects. << Well-built and strong walled kraal outrigger fence << Torches – mostly now LED << Loose rocks piled around specific << Ensuring animals can neither see in or out – use of some Translocation << Positioning of a drum in the land branding, fundamental equipment objects to protect them (good for sort of screening << Darting systems and drugs used middle and banging with a club to commute around the lands and elephants and hippos). << Chilli twine << Plastic boma mass capture method << Banging portable bits of tin or pots investigate sources of disturbances, << Bee fences (see King 2010.2012) << The provision of a ‘hot wire’ on top << Net boma and Net gun method for capture to actively ward off intruders actively ward off detractors and << Fortified with either Niteguard or PREDeter << Drop boma capture technique << Reflective plastic bottles with communicate intruder position Chilli dispenser repellence LED light systems inverted chip packets to reflect to nearby villagers and motorised << Mega-fogger chilli gun << The provision of 24/7 livestock guards and dogs where the starlight and directed torch beams units to help chase them off where << Aerosol mortar launcher threat is eminent 6.5. The Use of Sophisticated << Poly tapes and reflective streamers applicable. Torches are also useful << The ‘Mhiripiribomba’ << Crocodile fencing. << Catapults to reflect light from reflective bottles << The Ambush Chilli Educator Surveillance Systems that Include: << Community rallying to help one strategically placed in and around (ACE ambushchillibomba) Innovative approaches (mostly NGO driven) << Camera traps (CTs) that send pictures while alerting using another cropped lands << The ACE ambushchillixploda << Anatolian sheep dog, donkey and wildebeest minding Short Message Service (SMS) platforms << Stock whips << Various chilli applications that << Adaption of pyrotechnics rocket << Cheetah passage corridor - opening up game fences << Closed-circuit television (CCTV) covert surveillance << Various homemade ‘pipe’ bangers include: launcher << Conditioned taste aversion (CTA) systems including the filling of old cartridge <

34 A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. 35 KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures

6.6. Urban Mitigation Approaches Increasingly conflict between wildlife and people in towns and cities is a major source of both injury and has negative economic impacts. Methods need to be developed that are innovative and adaptable to this unique landscape. Some ideas include: << Identifying habituation behaviour and the coping strategy indicated by animals under stress in urban environments << Identifying and management of the key attractants drivers << Community buy-in issues << Lethal control (the quickest most efficient technique for wounded or incapacitated animals). 7. Recommended Species-Specific hwc Mitigation Measures

Several wildlife species are involved in HWC situations across the KAZA TFCA. Below we illustrate in the form of a table the animals received the most ranking scores when communities living with wildlife mentioned the animals involved in most of the HWC situations. We briefly recommend the possible planning strategies and tools available for mitigation in table 3 below. The animals are not listed in any particular order and the full description of the behavioural aspects of these animals in HWC situations is detailed in Appendix 2.

36 A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. 37 KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures

Table 2: Most problematic animals and suggested species-specific mitigation measures.

Strategy/Approach Strategy/Approach Tools to mitigation Tools to mitigation

Elephant (loxodonta Africana) Bush pig (Potamochoerus porcus)

<< Elephant corridors and paths << Electric fencing where possible (see AfESG 2000) << Understand the conditions under which bushpig << Diligence << An understanding of how, why and when elephants << Traditional fence with electric wire off-set thrive << Bush pig camp trap use paths and corridors is essential in the application << Fence fitted with noise makers such as cow bells << Reduce conditions for population increase in particu- << Good crop minding practices of mitigating measures. << Plastic bottle with inverted chip packets insert acts as a visual barrier lar waste wet area management << Agricultural Lands need to be planted in defendable << Effective crop guarding << Open out approach areas to crops clusters << Manned watch towers for farmers to guard fields at night (see << Exploit bushpig extraordinary sense of smell to repel << The first line defence from corridor or photographs) them << Establish a physical boundary << All the traditional tools << Actively exploit the dry season to reduce numbers << Consider a ‘motorised’ or chase-to-boundary by a << An alert fence and passive chilli applications << Open up boundaries response team to enforce boundaries << All the chilli options, both passive and active, used in conjunction to << Regular scout patrols to determine movement and lie << Cluster defence provide both discipline and reminder the include the ACE and up places << Individual land defence Mhiripiribomba options << Low close wire fencing ≤ 500mm height with strong << Translocation poles 7metres apart across vulnerable approaches << Biological Technologies i.e. << Set up and constantly change smell deterrents << Contraception << Regular night patrols in the cropped lands << Manipulating male reproduction and aggression

Hippo (Hippopotamus amphibius) Antelope – species of plains game

<< Provide and maintain passageways << Electric fence, if applicable << Repellence techniques work well for antelope << Streamers on fences work well << Lands planned in clusters that are properly fenced << Traditional fence with electric off set << Consider moving problem species to a collective << Try scent options like spraying on rendered down lion/leopard scats << Any development should be a minimum of 100 << Traditional fence wildlife use area metres away from the river or dam waterline << Defensive barrier fitted with a taut steel cable some 500mm above << Exploit value added opportunities it provides << Cluster defence - A strong solid barrier/fence or ground passing through large solid poles at 7metre intervals that they are << Good crop minding trench is essential unable to step over << Fencing is the best option << Apply individual crop/land minding in severely << Offset early warning fence (4-5 metres from barrier string set 2,2 m up) compromised fields << Fence can be fitted with cow bells << If these conditions cannot be met, seriously consider << Plastic bottle with inverted chip packets insert acts as a visual deterrent Crocodile (Crocodylus niloticus) translocation them elsewhere as the technology to << Effective on the spot crop guarding achieve this has been established << Manned watch tower recommended << Provide a minimum of 100 metres away from the << Diamond mesh crocodile protection fence << All the traditional tools discussed earlier river or dam waterline for houses and farming << Dedicated watch person diligently watching over activities within the << Barriers of any sort help to frustrate hippos activities protected area << Alert fence and passive chilli applications << Discourage passage and gathering of people close to << Protected area should be in shallow water exposed, totally free of << All the chilli options both passive and active used in conjunction to the waters’ edge vegetation rocks or debris build up provide both discipline and reminder the include the chilli dispenser << Plan water for consumptive purposes away from << Crocodile fences and the proper management of them. options natural water bodies << Kraals << Torches and bear-bangers << Specific crocodiles known as problem individuals << Trapping and translocation << Translocation options should be destroyed << Crocodile fence off a number of protected spots Baboon (Papio cynocephalus ursinus) opposite dwellings and night kraals, safe positions to access water << Remove all the infected baboon by lethal control << Dedicated guarding diligently watching over crops at all times << Where possible try to manage fishing along the rivers << Discourage new incursions around towns, villages or << Traditional methods that include: to try and improve fish harvesting in a sustainable homes << Banging tins manner << Diligently remove and incinerate all rubbish << Poly tapes and streamers Good livestock minding – herding cattle and goats main- << Encourage community buy in to enforce local bi-laws << catapults taining a watchful eye over them particularly when grazing and ensure clean living << Community rallying to help one another close to water and kraaling them at night. << Stock whips << Various homemade ‘pipe’ bangers Lion (Panthera leo) << Improved bangers (firing live rounds over the top, carbide bangers and crackers) << Must not be able to see in or out of night kraals << Diligence << Scarecrows - incorporating moving positions and hiding tactics to mimic << Kraals built providing solid walls << Well-built kraals real life situations << Exposed as much as possible << Good livestock minding << Manned watch tower recommended to deal with chronic incursions << Livestock properly herded at all times << LED lights << Use of guard dogs << Away from protected areas << lethal control options << Community rally to provide organised drives to chase them out from the << Dedicated guarding diligently watching over the << PAC hunting area to the PA’s livestock at all times << Trapping and translocation << Capture, paint and release of dominant males through cage traps << Implement some sort of flashing LED light system on << For extreme cases the removal of entire troops using large camp traps the kraal walls << Watch towers << Strive to let the animals out earlier to graze and bring << Community participation them back before sundown << ACE ambushchillixploders << Cage traps << Large camp traps << Green laser 38 A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. 39 KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures

Strategy/Approach to mitigation Tools

Leopard (Panthera pardus © P Sutera << Maintain passage ways through ‘cheetah window’ << Diligence through protected area << Well-built kraals << Minimise access to livestock << Good livestock minding << Incorporate human and animal minders << LED lights 8. Schemes to Compensate People for Loss to Wildlife << Keep them out – proper herding << Problem leopard - management of habituated individuals << Incorporate an animal minder imprinted on each << lethal control options 8.1. Compensation in Perspective herd to chase away cheetah << PAC hunting << Night kraals should still be used to ward off attacks by << Culling other animals << Trapping and translocation Compensation and insurance schemes promote the mitigation of the effects of << Livestock properly herded at all times << Away from protected areas wildlife conflict once people incur damages by making payments to cover << Dedicated guarding diligently watching over the livestock at all times losses from predation. These measures have both ex ante (based on forecasts rather than actual results) as well as ex post (based on actual results rather than Wild dog or Painted Dog (Lycaon pictus forecasts) benefits (FAO, 2009). HWC compensation schemes aim to spread the << Daily patrolling by qualified tracker scouts is essential << Diligence to accurately monitor game, livestock and carnivore << Well-built kraals costs of wildlife conservation more fairly within society. movement and activity << Good livestock minding << Vigilance is essential to quickly discover the arrival of the dogs to the area and their general movement patterns << Mobilise minders to limit Lycaon access to livestock << Consider temporary fencing a smaller more manageable area until the dogs move on << Keep them out – proper herding << Night kraals should still be used to ward off attacks by other animals << Livestock properly herded at all times << Dedicated guarding diligently watching over the livestock at all times

Black-backed jackal (Canis mesomelas)

<< Keep all domestic dogs vaccinated against rabies. << Apply jackal proof fencing << Place all lame, incapacitated animals and cows having << Guard dogs difficulty in calving under direct protection. << Separate and kraal infirm animals << Discourage unusual jackal build up. << Consider the use of toxicants only if necessary.

Quelea (Quelea quelea lathemii)

<< Active destruction of nests and fledglings during << String fences and streamers around the edge and within lands breeding << Scare crows << Good bird minding that includes active chasing away << Wind effected plastic sheeting and bags of birds alighting onto the crop using a variety of << Bangers and other noise providers such as whips improvised tools << Active Human presence << Small scale trapping of Quelea has been successfully << Tools carried out using standard box traps covered with << Catapults ½ inch bird mesh of 1mx1m square 300mm high << Traps providing several tapered funnels of ± 250mm length around the edge leading in, adopting the ‘fish trap’ principle so that birds wandering in do not find their way out << Various designs of catapult traps

40 A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. 41 KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures

Specifically, they aim to reimburse costs of lost property or assistance. Compensation can range from more than fair << They are susceptible to moral hazard. In other words, when the full value for a lost good is paid and/or protection is more life. Compensation programs may also aim to increase market value to just a fraction of the value of the lost property. costly (or less preferable) to seeking compensation, it may be easier to allow a loss than to protect one’s property, which tolerance for wildlife and conservation policies, thereby may result in negligent ownership. reducing illegal killing of wildlife and resistance to Compensation programs typically target single species or small << They are difficult to reduce or phase out once begun. As wildlife populations’ recover or spread, the costs may increase. conservation management actions (Muruthi, 2005). However, groups of species. Payment for damage by large or predatory << If special interest politics and lobbying prevails in swaying payment rules, costs are likely to increase. these approaches and programs are rarely successful unless protected species is common. In most schemes, there is a << Trade-offs are often invisible (high opportunity costs). Namely, the funds used for compensation could be devoted to other people affected by conflicts view them as their own and are narrow definition of what or who is eligible for conservation activities or other wildlife. willing to invest in their success. compensation. For example, compensation for damage by << Recipients tend to view compensation as inadequate – even if generous financially – because of wasted time, lost specific large predators may be limited to livestock owners investments, stress, frustration, or fear. Although considered a key component of a human wildlife following specified animal husbandry guidelines. Some << Payments do not appear to raise the tolerance for the damaging wildlife among recipients – although beforehand- after conflict strategy, the use of compensation mechanisms as programs may target single species damaging specific crops; assessments of the same individuals are lacking. a mitigation tool for human wildlife conflict has had mixed others may pay for any damage resulting from any protected << Compensation programs appear to create political space for multi-stakeholder discussions of wildlife policy – although results (Lamarque et al., 2008; FAO, 2009). A number of species or from any species if the damage occurs in a systematic studies of this conjecture are lacking. schemes formulated and implemented in a wide variety of prescribed area (Cozza et al., 1996, de Klemm, 1996). << Political clashes between donors, payers, and recipients are likely, especially during formulation or renegotiation of rules. environments and governance contexts have taken a variety << Donor disaffection or defection from the program is likely if rules change, wildlife are reclassified, or if lethal control of of forms. According to Nyhus et. al., (2003), a major benefit attributed wildlife is paired with compensation payments. This is especially true where donors have short-term funding horizons and to compensation programs is that they may increase sustainability lies further into the future. In Africa, HWC compensation schemes are scarce and have tolerance of wildlife and promote more positive attitudes rarely been effective (Lamarque et al., 2008; FAO, 2009). A and support for conservation among people who live closest All compensation schemes, whether community-run or operated by some other entity, require clear rules to lower the risk of few government-run schemes have been initiated (Botswana, to endangered and dangerous animals (Wagner et al. 1997). corruption. Such guidelines relate to the management (e.g., transparent accounting and monitoring) and separation of powers Kenya, Zimbabwe, Mozambique) but these have generally When carried out effectively, compensation programs raise between verifiers of claims, payers of claims, and managers of funds. Putting in place monitoring structures that use scientific not lasted long and the ones that remain (Botswana) have not awareness about community concerns and shift economic verification and separation of authority between verifiers, recipients and payers, or through systems of community peer placated farmers due to low compensation rates, responsibility to a broader public depending on where the pressure minimise the risk of fraud. procedural barriers to many rural poor, and administrative funds come from. Compensation may result in a landowner delays (Muruthi, 2005, Lamarque et al., 2008; FAO, 2009). giving a wild animal additional chances or result in discussions of how to prevent conflict in the first place. Conservation 8.4. Namibia’s Self Reliance System In their most common form, compensation schemes target education and moral persuasion may be more effective in the The Namibian government developed the Human Wildlife Self Reliance Scheme (HWSRS) specifically reimbursement of individuals or their families who have presence of compensation. In the absence of effective to provide the means to offset the losses of communities and individual farmers caused to livestock experienced wildlife depredation. This is mainly in the form compensation programs, revenge killing or poaching may be and crops. The intention was also to promote the equitable distribution of benefits derived from of damage to crops, livestock, property, or people injured or more likely. For example, Zambia has an arrangement of wildlife so that individuals who suffer losses can benefit from wildlife income (Jones, et al 2014). The killed by wildlife. People experiencing wildlife damage may assisting affected people when a person loses life to wildlife strategic approach under the HWSRS is that payments are made to cover livestock losses at rates that receive compensation in the form of cash or in-kind through the Disaster Management Policy. do not cover the full value of the animal concerned but aim to partially offset the loss to the farmer. In the case of damages to crops, a payment at a determined rate is also made to cover for damages as 8.2. Botswana’s Compensation Scheme approved by the review panel. Botswana is the only member of the SADC and consequently of the KAZA TFCA to employ a state However, in administering the scheme, MET works with NGOs and with the regional councils. Funds budgeted for the scheme funded compensation system. Compensation systems involves paying reparations to property owners are transferred by the MET to the conservancies for localised management although in some conservancies the MET continues for losses incurred to wildlife. The underlying tenet of all compensation schemes is that payments to carry the functions of the allocation of the matching funds as well as the assessment and investigations of damages. In encourage tolerance for losses by minimizing the economic impact of these losses (Nyhus et al., gazetted conservancies, the review panels consist of the representatives of MET, support NGO, the conservancy committee and 2005). In essence, compensation is a method for increasing tolerance for a problem and not a traditional authority while in non-conservancy areas, MET appoint a Ministerial review panel of not less than three staff method of preventing the problem from occurring. members to assess the application from payments and make recommendations for approval. People suffering losses from wildlife are able to claim for compensation from damages to livestock, crops and other properties. In order for the scheme to be self-sustaining, the HWC policy has a provision that when the government is issuing quotas for Payments are not for the replacement value of the losses but generally, for no more than 80% of the value (DWNP, 1998). trophy hunting in conservancies, the quota allows for funds to pay for the livestock and crop damages to members of such On filing a claim, the DWNP are required to validate it by investigating the evidence submitted and identifying the animal conservancies. For non-conservancies claims, contributions also come from the Game Product Trust Fund. In addition, donors responsible and whether the species is on the list eligible for compensation. approved by the government can contribute to the scheme. As noted by Kgathi and Mosepele (2012), the compensation rates for damage by predators in Botswana are about 35% of Five livestock species namely cattle, goat, sheep, donkey and horse are covered in the scheme in both conservancy and the market value of the livestock, but households expect higher payments (higher percentage of the market value). While the non-conservancy areas on state land and resettlement farms. There are five conditions outlined in the scheme for claims to old compensation system in Botswana paid farmers regardless of the animal husbandry practices adopted, the current system be valid when there is death of any of the specified livestock species because of wildlife attacks. The national policy on HWC reimburses farmers only if there is evidence that efforts to reduce the risk of predation were in place by adopting good animal states that: husbandry practices. However, indications are that the compensation is now at 100%. This will likely reduce the incentive for << Payments are only made for livestock killed in the multiple use zones of zoned national parks and not for livestock killed in most farmers to protect their crops and livestock, as they can receive a payment after any conflict incident. a national park or conservancy exclusive wildlife zone; << Livestock death must be reported within 24 hours of the incident occurring, unless a valid reason for not doing so as 8.3. Common Challenges of Compensation Schemes12 stipulated is provided and the evidence thereof is still visible; << The cause of death must be verified by a MET staff member or a community game guard where structures exists; << They are susceptible to corruption when managers/payers misappropriate funds. << No payment is made if the livestock was killed without reasonable precautions being put in place; << They are susceptible to fraud when recipients exaggerate, conceal, or fabricate evidence in support of claims. << MET staff members together conservancy staff (if inside the conservancy) and traditional leaders inspect livestock enclosures << Scientific verification and separation of authority between verifiers, recipients and payers can reduce the risk of fraud. and advise where strengthening is required. << They are susceptible to waste when financial transactions, claims, or verifications are cumbersome, costly, or time-consuming.

12 Excerpt FAO, 2009

42 A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. 43 KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures

As for crops (specifically maize, millet, sorghum and was this tenant of matching payments. This means far less 8.4.1. Analysis of Namibian Human Wildlife Self Reliance Scheme (SWOT Analysis) vegetables damages), payments are only made for those likelihood for fraud and the system will be self-policing. This is caused by elephants and hippopotamus as such damages are similar to the basic ideas behind game theory. Implementing Table 3: HWSRS SWOT analysis. believed to be beyond farmers’ control. No payments are agencies noted that the amount of claims dropped and there made for damages caused by other animals because of two was less fraud if local communities were matching the payments. reasons; (a) such damages are difficult to verify and (b) it is HWSRS SWOT analysis possible (according to the policy) for farmers to take There are the pricing issues around the value of livestock or precautionary measures to control other animals. crops damaged. How much is a cow worth and how much Strengths Weaknesses should be paid out has to be weighed against what a Some conservancies do not generate any revenue but still get conservancy can afford or what they want to or what was the << Has put in place a mechanism to compensate for loss << Back-up insurance scheme payments by removal of predators is not a the matching funds. The N$60,000 each conservancy gets animal worth. For example, where a Conservancy can only of life, crops and other damages because of increased sustainable strategy (if the goals include wildlife conservation). annually is not dependent on the level of conflict or value of afford say N$800 but the market value may be N$3000 so a wildlife after improved conservation. << There seem to be weak/no-legal framework to support this system to < loss caused by wildlife. compromise of is reached. When a wild animal kills some- < Devolving management of funds at the lowest level ensure its financial sustainability. empowered local communities. << There is a gap in terms of ensuring appropriate skills at community level for one, a funeral contribution of N$5000 is paid out without any << Low level of bureaucracy development of specific management interventions. The key component for why the previous scheme worked questions and quickly helps with perception issues. << Compensation targets individuals who incurred costs. << The scheme does not account for the different impacts of human wildlife << Payments made to those who have taken measures to conflicts or damages according to the status of individual households. The protect their livestock/crops from damage. damage to the crops of poor small producers will have higher impact than << Internalisation of both the costs and benefit of living similar damage to the crops of more wealthy family with larger croplands. with wildlife. This is different from other cases that << The scheme is a not clear about those living close to wildlife habitat but are donor dependency. not in conservancies who have high chances of facing damage problems. << Economic benefits derived from wildlife under this Agricultural enterprises (both crops and livestock) located close to wildlife scheme are greater than those incurred from wildlife habitat/corridors may suffer many times problems resulting in a related damages are. This gives strong motivation for significant drop of their incomes. This does not give much motivation to communities to live with wildlife despite the these people, as the scheme does not cater for them entirely. problems caused by it. << It is difficult to place a value on the most significant and catastrophic << For the scheme to work it should not be in isolation impact of HWC - human injury or loss of life. from the ability of communities to generate other economic benefits.

OPPORTUNITIES THREATS

<< Improve policy dialogue at local and national levels. << Potential for increasing human population attracted to income generated << Network building based on the insurance scheme from wildlife. They will likely lead to increased human wildlife conflict. model at national and regional levels. << Risk of elite capture in paying out compensation. << Potential for improved knowledge in dealing with << In the event of many communities affected (whose crops, livestock HWC issues and compensation schemes destroyed), more funds than available may be required for << Improved governance, increased empowerment, compensations. increased skills and capacity. << Valuing impact of damage might cause new conflicts or disputes especially << Diversified livelihoods and increased income. if there are misunderstandings among people. 8.4.2. Namibia’s HWSRS: Is Replication Possible in Other Partner Countries? Design and there is generally no abuse of the system. In addition, The conservancies established the precursor to the HWSRS in claim conditions are strict and this encourages responsibility 2003 for application within the borders of their conservancies. among the communities. In most cases, the actual loss This system has its own management structures and a incurred would be far less than anticipated which make this conservation mandate to generate and distribute wildlife- relatively affordable. Both financial and technical support derived income equitably. The main purpose of HWSRS is to from NGOs partners is critical in driving this system. provide a mechanism that paid out for loss of life, livestock and crops13. Replication in other countries For replication in other countries, understanding policy HWSRS is not a typical insurance scheme where premiums context and influencing it towards this is essential. The model are paid in advance, hence the term self-insurance. It is more should be well recognised by the national policies. National of a condition-based payment where registered conservancy governments should be prepared to devolve power to the members have to take mutually agreed proactive measures to lowest level as done in Namibia for this to be successful. protect themselves, their crops and cattle. Communities are Ways of ensuring transparency and accountability as well as willing to pay out after an incident occurred as opposed to local management all backed by favourable policies should advance payments like in most commercial insurance systems. be in place. The idea of building networks and partnerships to support the scheme is important for this system to work. What makes it work? Capacity building including local administration of the scheme Collective income from tourism and wildlife is successfully should be at the forefront to help build strong foundation for used to compensate registered members who incur losses. the system. Partner countries also need to put in place Management of this system is devolved to the lowest level, mechanisms to diversify their sources of income for the

13 http://www.nacso.org.na/dwnlds/training_manuals/3.06%20HWC.pdf

44 A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. 45 KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures

communities to benefit fully. In Namibia, much of the revenue comes from the hunting industry. In countries where hunting has been banned such Botswana and Angola, it would be essential that lucrative alternative revenue streams be established for this to be applicable.

8.4.3. Core Elements for a Successful Adoption of the HWSRS in Partner Countries © P Sutera Quick, accurate verification of damage 1 This requires training, adequate tools to properly identify losses, and a mechanism to establish trust 9. Capacity Needs Assessment for Communities among all participants to ensure that the process is fair and honest. 9.1. Training in Mitigation Strategies Prompt and fair payment The main objective of the Training Needs Assessment assignment was to 2 Timely payment can temper the anger of wildlife damage victims and reduce retaliation against animals or conservation authorities. The compensation process needs to be transparent, protected against abuse, assess the partner countries’ training needs and recommend training modules to account for unverifiable losses (i.e., when it is difficult to determine how or how many livestock were killed), and be capable of evaluating differences in the value of different livestock or crops. respond to the identified needs. The whole assignment ran from the post inception-meeting period (September 2015) until the report validation meeting. Sufficient and sustainable funds Twenty-one stakeholders representing 17 institutions derived from all the partner 3 An inadequately funded scheme may cause more problems than no scheme at all. Wildlife damage may vary considerably from year to year, or wildlife may make multiple kills creating large losses at a single countries participated in the exercise. point in time. Managers need to plan for contingencies, for long-term sustainability, and/or for an exit strategy. Solid baseline information is necessary to accurately predict future compensation claims and to determine if compensation makes sense in a local context.

Site specificity 4 Although there are some general guidelines that can aid wildlife managers in implementing effective self-insurance/compensation schemes, it is important to be sensitive to site, species, and culture-specific issues. A sense of shared program ownership between local people and institutions running the schemes can reduce the potential for conflict and abuse.

Clear rules and guideline 5 Successful programs tend to have strong institutional support and clear guidelines. Self-insurance schemes linkages to sound management practices becomes critical. Efforts cannot be ad hoc.

Measures of success 6 Is a compensation scheme having its intended impact? For example, are more people supportive of wildlife and conservation? The first purpose of the scheme is always to ensure that those who have a loss from wildlife receive payment. Ultimately, are fewer animals of conservation interest being killed than would have been without the program? If one wants to have a scheme that positively affects improved stewardship, then it could twin the scheme with a conservation performance payment, i.e. payment incentives for good management, and not just wait for a loss before making payments.

Despite the apparent potential implementation characteristics of the HWSRS in the partner countries, the fact is that there is no experience of testing of this approach in a different setting apart from Namibia. This would suggest that, before the extensive promotion and adoption of this approach, undertaking some pilot studies and model testing is vital to understand the viability and applicability of this scheme in all the partner countries. In the case of Angola, establishment of CBNRM is important where awareness and training programs takes centre stage.

Key determinants of success for compensation schemes typically include the accurate and rapid verification of damage, prompt and fair payment embedded in a transparent process. A long-term source of funding capable of responding to variations in damage over time, clear rules and guidelines that link payment to sound management practices, an appreciation of the cultural and socioeconomic context, and an ability to actively monitor the wildlife population of interest.

46 A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. 47 KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures

The main approach used in the whole exercise was participatory systematic stakeholder consultation. Formal and informal interviews formed the basis of primary communication with most stakeholders with invitations to validate the identified training needs and training modules. It is recommended that the partner countries should promote a CBNRM based HWC mitigation concept that seeks to achieve structural transformation, which will sustain community empowerment by making the communities affected by HWC more tolerant, responsible and resilient in managing conflict situations. See appendix 3 for a detailed species (elephant) based training module that can be adapted to suit other wildlife species.

9.1.1. Defining Capacity Needs and Strategies Major tasks for the training needs assessment were as follows: << Examine the structure and operations of a selected number of organizations including but not limited to the partner countries’ national parks and wildlife authorities and communities living with wildlife. << Interview KLOs from all the partner countries to examine areas of training gaps and actual training requirements. << Through probing, clearly define the expected impact according to the organization e.g. organizations operating in the KAZA TFCA and involved in HWC mitigation in terms of conflict mitigation protocols. << By interviewing the traditional local authorities in some of the partner countries exploring the traditional knowledge in-house training skills available in the affected communities and their ease of access. << Where possible, visit the targeted areas (i.e. area of potential training beneficiaries) to identify local experience available, which can be called on for demonstration as realistic examples in the area of training. << Examine the past and current training materials/programs of the concerned area in the organizations and identify their strengths and weaknesses relative to the identified needs. This involved traveling to some of sites in the partner countries. © P. Sutera © P. Sutera © P. Sutera © P. Sutera << By reviewing and comparing the material content with the common concerns of the rural people affected by wildlife depredations, assess the applicability of those materials to specific situations, and how locally available materials usage in technical demonstrations is a requirement. << Build the corresponding training modules per group of needs/institutions. << Incorporate the findings of the training needs into the training modules

9.2. Data Collection Data collection methods used in the exercise included the following: << Secondary records: this included reading the literature provided by the partner countries as well as other sourced from partners. << Semi-Structured Interviews (SSI) used throughout the TNA exercise. << 3Ls Survey: (Look, Listen and Learn) method was used during visits to the operating project sites. << Focus group discussions (FGD) were conducted with CBOs

9.3. Training Needs Findings Knowledge and practice of training concepts and process. Under HWC mitigation training, it was noted that there is need to have communities affected by conflict understand the following questions; << What is Human Wildlife Conflict (HWC)? << Where does it occur in your community (spatial aspect) << Who is responsible for solving HWC? << When does it occur (temporal aspect)? << Is the conflict increasing or decreasing? << How does it occur? << What causes it? << Which animals affect you? << Which animals are the most problematic? << When did you first experience the problem? << Where does these animals come from? << How many come at once? << How often /frequent do they come? << What are the current mitigation measures in your community? << Are the mitigation measures working? (Explain) << Which mitigation measures would you propose? © P. Sutera

48 A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. 49 KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures

Above all, they need to know the general behaviour of problem animal species particularly in conflict situations. Most respondents wanted to identify how training processes particularly those aimed at HWC mitigation need linkages with CBNRM. Some partners define CBNRM in terms of geographical location of management functions. Consequently, most CBNRM capacity building efforts seek to create structures, which can respond effectively to the demands of a natural resources project management functions. For example, in a number of CBNRM activities, the formation of CBOs and training in leader-

ship skills and functions forms the basic requirement. Development workers prescribe job descriptions to the committees. In ©A. Stronza this case, the consultant emphasized the need for co-management of HWC between parks officials and affected communities, sharing responsibility. Most partners while clear about the meaning were not sure on how to initiate community-based conflict mitigation (CBCM). The concept of co-management begs a number of questions such as why co-management? Is it co-owner- 10. recommended Institutional Arrangements, Principles and ship? Co-decision making? Co-evaluation? Co-accountability? Co-responsibility? Co-benefiting? Is it a partnership? Alternatively, is it a transitional strategy towards autonomous community based conflict mitigation and natural resources management? These Governing Policies were some of the questioned raised by most respondents.

As in CBNRM, the main issue in a CBCM approach is structural: powerlessness. This means that communities, at some We have outlined what we believe are many of the fundamental constraints and historical time, lost ownership, control, influence and/or responsibility over the means (natural resources) as well as the initiative to try to reduce conflict that is critical to their own development. In this case, a CBCM approach becomes an empowerment complexities associated with HWC. There are many levels that HWC need to be process to regain lost power, ownership, decision-making and control of the conflict mitigation process. Community-Based- understood and managed including the most difficult, political. In our specific Mitigation is a participatory educational/learning and action process, in which the communities are the subjects and proponents of the process. The process revolves around the knowledge, skills, decisions, institutions, organic leadership, technology, breakdowns we will outline methods that vary from country-to-country, culture, felt needs, aspirations, and other capacities of the beneficiary community in mobilizing and implementing HEC reduction techniques. In addition, the community does the functions of management, such as, planning, implementation, region-to-region; but most of the interventions, institutional arrangements and maintenance, monitoring, evaluation, benefiting and re-planning of the techniques. principles we are advising to be adopted are universally applicable to all conflict Feedback showed that the most dominant training approach most of the training participants experienced prior the interview is teacher/facilitator-centred. The training is based on pedagogical principles. The development worker or parks officer knows situations. it all, and the community knows nothing approach. Messages are already accepted as true, so a community is expected to accept. The main impact of the teacher-centred approach is that it turns most adults into children. CBCM aims to change this approach where communities become perpetually dependent on extension workers or parks authorities to solve their wildlife related problems. Intellectual self-reliance, creativity and self-management are retarded whereas CBCM enhance these. Instead of education fulfilling its humanizing process, which all humans are capable of, the approach dehumanizes. Communities do not have to wait for outsiders to tell them how to survive in their habitats.

9.4. Training Needs Assessment Conclusion << Most organizations in the partner countries have structures and operations that have adequate capacity to contribute to sustainable CBNRM and consequently CBCM. That however, needs to be re-aligned and coordinated better. << CBNRM Training has so far focused on giving messages and some skills in a teacher-pupil relationship. Technical training in CBNRM is still required in several areas of capacity building particularly process training and continuous follow-ups that remain the weakest. This was noticed in most HWC mitigation demonstration sites whose conditions were not up to a level expected of a demo site. It was however attributed to a lack of proper and extensive training and also the seasonality of the conflict. << There is little documentation on local CBNRM examples or models. Most of what is documented is based on donor projects. Natural resources management and subsequently CBCM is not just a project, and cannot be waiting for donors. In fact, natural resources management, particularly CBCM requires less of school education but sound ecological management practices are a product of culture, which is a mechanism for adaptation and hence survival. << Skills set required in the majority of the KAZA landscape related to HWC include; << Conservation farming << Sustainable natural resources extraction and utilization (include fishing, water harvesting, etc) << Recording and monitoring of HWC incidences << Identification of problem animal species particularly where livestock has been killed << Identification of alternative sources of income and livelihood coping strategies

50 A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. 51 KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures

The practical solution to the problem of wildlife damage lies not in blaming the people or the animals but in establishing data can be entered into a smart phone and accessed on the web instantly is something that PPF has been working on for some appropriate legal and institutional arrangements on wildlife damage, while at the same time adopting benign alleviation time. This system, which uses ArcGIS mobile platform ArcCollector15, allows any content recording, visualisation of content via measures. This should work hand in hand with a conservation strategy and laws that take into account core human welfare graphs and charts and spatial data reporting via maps. concerns, values because while humans have responsibility for wildlife welfare, human welfare is paramount hence prioritised. Admittedly, the HWC cannot be fully resolved thus, management of people’s attitudes and perceptions is critical. There is need therefore for the five partner countries to have effective legal and institutional arrangements on wildlife damage and maintain sustainable wildlife management systems that do not undermine human rights, human welfare and livelihoods.

In this section, we review the importance of regular monitoring and its role in adaptive management14 . This approach creates a logical feedback system for managers in a system like the KAZA TFCA that plugs data from regular monitoring into a decision tree. It is an effective way to manage a large heterogeneous and volatile system. Partner countries need to apply an adaptive management approach in addressing HWC problems, modifying mitigation tools and methods through continuous learning and feedback. We also stress the need to combine monitoring and evaluation with an intervention to improve the current situation.

Admittedly, HWC cannot be fully resolved but the rage the people have towards the animals. There is need therefore for the five partner countries to have effective legal and institutional arrangements on wildlife damage and maintain sustainable wildlife management systems that do not undermine human rights, human welfare and livelihoods. To achieve this, we recommends the following reforms:

10.1. Need for Constitutional Provisions on Wildlife While most of the partner countries have legislative provisions on wildlife, all the countries lack constitutional provisions on wildlife or even natural resources. A national Constitution is a basic charter for a country representing the goals as well as the primary obligations and mandate of state and governmental authorities. It should therefore recognize a country’s major resources and sectors of which wildlife is a major resource in all the partner countries. Such a provision could preferably be in the form of a statement of public policy, for instance, stating that wildlife is a national heritage vested in the state on behalf of, and for the benefit of, the present and future generations. Such provisioning would not only be a guideline for governmental action in matters of wildlife, but would also have given direction on issues of wildlife ownership, control, use, as well as benefits, and costs.

10.2. Establishing a Compensation Fund for Wildlife Damage Under the wildlife damage compensation and or self-reliance schemes in both Botswana and Namibia, compensation/offset payments are from budgetary allocations voted by Parliament from the Consolidated Fund according to expenditure items that Parliament consider a priority at the time. Such priorities usually vary according to circumstances and political exigencies and there is no guarantee that wildlife damage will always remain a top priority item, hence there is usually not enough allocation for wildlife damage compensation. If all the partner countries are going to adapt a self-reliance or compensation scheme, there is need therefore to set up a fund specifically designated for paying victims of wildlife damage. Monies from this fund should then be used only for compensating damage caused by wildlife. Such monies may be derived from revenue from tourism and wildlife related activities, or through the traditional methods of raising government revenue, for instance, taxation.

A policy of sharing of benefits and revenue will ensure that the local communities benefit positively and directly from wildlife revenue as well as benefits such as boosting cottage industries and improving communal infrastructure such as schools and hospitals. Other benefits could include: allowing some grazing of domestic animals within designated sections of protected areas during drought periods; allowing local people to cut thatching grass for personal use on a regulated basis; allowing people to access water sources in the protected areas; providing transit through protected areas without permit requirements.

10.3. Data Collection and Mitigation Figure 3: HWC ArcGIS mobile platform developed by PPF for Existing and Developing Spatial Knowledge & Integrated Planning The HWC problem is so acute in most regions of the KAZA that there is no time to do ‘proper science’ and we recommend Resources in KAZA. that an aggressive mitigation program be set. In many areas, communities are experiencing interview fatigue. They are now cynical about any benefits new projects might bring them. Using the lessons learned from a range of recent interventions across A similar system set up in India articulates the advantages of this system: “This initiative seeks to document and map the various the KAZA and beyond famers can easily withdraw their support for well-intended interventions. Once a project suggests an instances of human wildlife conflict across the Asia, in the hope of improving our understanding of the issue. Such a platform idea to communities, it needs following through in a reasonable amount of time or people become disaffected. will strive to include features allowing anyone interested to provide relevant information, and add to the diverse range of instances. http://www.wildlifeconflict.org” Technological solutions involving data collection often fail in rural Africa for a range of reasons and no technology will outpace the simplicity of pen and paper but a combination of the two is highly beneficial as technology has the extraordinary power in It is also important to try to have funding in place for a multiyear program as all interventions take a few seasons to institute. communicating messages. While not part of the ToR’s for this consultancy, we support the idea of the data collection system Importantly, many conflict situations are highly seasonal and farmer, community and institutional memories can be short. developed by PPF for KAZA TFCA and believe it should be implemented and expanded. This idea of a ‘live platform’ where

14 Adaptive management (AM), also known as adaptive resource management (ARM), is a structured, iterative process of 15 https://www.esri.com/products/collector-for-arcgis robust decision making in the face of uncertainty, with an aim to reducing uncertainty over time via system monitoring. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adaptive_management

52 A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. 53 KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures

10.4. Specific Interventions setting up carbon sequestration compensation mechanisms << Investment in a highly focused and targeted public encourages farmers to shift to CA and other sustainable relations campaign to inform national decision-makers, We suggest a multiple phased approach toward addressing HWC in the KAZA region: agriculture practices. A long-term strategy that includes international conservation organisations and the The vision we have involves a three-tiered approach that follows a Vertical Integration Model VIM). This approach attempts pursuing these avenues of market generation and an enriched international general public and decision-makers of the to harmonize policies as the causes and effects of HWC occur at multiple scales and across multiple sectors. VIM is a process, local economy will also contribute significantly to nurturing issues concerning HWC and wildlife management which attempts to integrate governance activities at the local, national, and international levels to effectively face the challenge empowerment and reduced vulnerability among farmers in << Lobby to have issues pertaining to HWC to be included of wildlife conflict (Anstey 2010). the KAZA TFCA. in the education curriculum of schools for communities to learn formally about such issues from a young age. This 10.4.1. Record and ‘Off-Set’ 10.4.3. Long-term Interventions to is possible through the existing structures in the wildlife It is crucial that there is local support for monitoring and data collection that can better inform decision-making through departments such as the Environmental Education and calculation and quantifying wildlife damage as economic data, quantifying farming areas ‘at risk’ in each HWC zone, Address HWC Extension Program as well as the Community Extension producing HWC maps at different scales suitable as well as comparing relative levels of pest species damage. Farmers need to Land-use planning and Outreach Division or through NGOs operating in the feel that informing wildlife authorities about an incident has some value and in some way, their participation in the process will The main factor attributed to causing many conflicts between region. work toward improving the situation. humans and wildlife is land use change. Wildlife habitats can become reduced and fragmented when more and more is 10.4.4. Policy Harmonization This should not be in the form of compensation but a modified self-assurance scheme that is transparent, administered locally converted to agricultural land or human settlements, which in The policies relating to HWC that we have outlined in the and has farmer support. This goes a considerable way toward improving the relationship with stakeholders who are suffering turn lead to more frequent interactions between people and previous sections need reviewing by a KAZA-TFCA losses. Community participation in the damage assessment is important for the transparency of the system. Earnings from elephants wildlife. One long term mitigation strategy to committee and harmonized over time. Policy harmonization consumptive use of wildlife and ecotourism income serve as a long-term source of revenue to compensate farmers suffering reduce HWC is to reduce the size of agricultural land should be done at national and then at KAZA level to manage from crop damage and livestock loss by contributing to the self-insurance scheme capital. required by farmers (Songhurst 2012), allow free movement of wildlife along identified corridors (Chase & Griffin 2009) resource utilization particularly where resources are shared by countries. The policy review also meant to identifying the As noted above it is crucial to mitigate conflict and this can be achieved through the methods we have outlined in the and develop more effective micro-level land use planning constraints of the frameworks, in relation to cross-sectoral species-specific section attached as appendix 2. It is important to highlight that to keep farmers engaged with the mitigation (Hoare 1995). A clear understanding of spatial use of both inconsistencies, information gaps and impediments process they need to believe that it is beneficial to adopt the methods suggested. people and wildlife in an area is required to assist with such detailed land use planning, current and future movement to implementation contained therein, and highlighting opportunities to engage with and contribute to future policy An important question that we have been confronted with is: How do we motivate farmers to a) collect data and b) to routes, favoured habitats and resource locations. It is also implementation and decision-making. Several policies in each mitigate? In this case we suggest the establishment and reenergizing of HWC committees, as appropriate, involving interested important to understand the population dynamics of both country are relevant in terms of their contribution as drivers of stakeholders from a variety of sectors to advise management authorities. This is crucial for moving any mitigation initiative human and wildlife populations, in order to predict future HWC, while others guide the current strategies that address forward. land use requirements. Partner countries should build on current knowledge and collect data on wildlife and human HWC. Policy related drivers of HWC arise, primarily, from the current multiplicity of sectoral policies, programmes, One of the things we have observed across the region is a disproportional amount of effort put into recording PAC. Many of spatial use in the respective countries in order to find ways legislations and regulations that guide the use of land and the people responsible to collect these data are poorly paid, unmotivated and constrained by lack of transport and access to to accommodate the needs of both species in future land use natural resources, which are often inconsistent and airtime. plans through zoning different land uses. Other long-term interventions intertwined with land use planning to address conflicting. For example, in Botswana, agricultural policy encourages the clearing of land for cultivation, providing 10.4.2. Promote Conservation Aqagriculture the conflict should consider: << Incentives provided for landowners not to convert land incentives through the Integrated Support Programme for Conservation Agriculture (CA) has tremendous potential for In addition, a major challenge to unsustainable land use is the from bush to fields. Arable Agricultural Development (ISPAAD). This is a achieving sustainable yield increases by improving the growth traditional ‘slash and burn’ agricultural practice, whereby << Increase and harmonize research related to wildlife and Government grant scheme to plough, fence and cultivate, conditions for crops and the efficiency of input (www.fao.org/ naturally low existing soil fertility is greatly reduced by communities to inform decisions. while a number of natural resource management and ag/ca). CA is a zero-tillage-based cropping system for farmers continual same crop production and drives farmers to << Consolidate farms by forming cultivation zones away from sustainable use policies provide for the promotion of wildlife in low and erratic rainfall areas, with poor soils that offers an abandon their fields after 5 to 10 years and seek new land wildlife corridors and critical ranges. and its sustainable use in the eastern panhandle WMAs and array of practices, but at its core are three interlinked elsewhere. CA, therefore, reduces the size of agricultural land << Harmonise land-use planning approaches across all the protection of important wildlife areas, like corridors. A principles that can be applied in a variety of combinations to required by farmers and also makes existing fields sustainably sectors by Government department policies on land use lack of appropriate land use planning (zoning of land uses) meet the needs of resource-poor farmers and enable them to productive, thereby, curbing the ‘slash and burn’ farming need to be harmonised). in the eastern panhandle and elsewhere in Botswana means, grow more crops in a smaller area: continuous minimal practice. << Develop, as appropriate, long-term plans to manage however, that these opposing policies create frequent overlap mechanical soil disturbance; permanent organic soil cover; locally overabundant wildlife populations in harmony with of land uses and conflict arises as a result. Other challenges and, diversified crop rotations of annual crops and plant Farmers fields in most of the KAZA are also often situated national wildlife policies. arise from conflicts between national policy on wildlife associations of perennial crops. CA, therefore, offers the far from the village to avoid livestock raiding, however, this << Enforce anti-poaching to minimize illegal killing of wildlife ownership and inconsistencies with regards to local potential to significantly improve food security among rural then makes fields more susceptible to elephant crop-raiding that sometimes drives wildlife close to human settlement devolution of wildlife management and benefit potential subsistence farmers. By increasing yield in a smaller area, (Songhurst 2012). If people can plough sufficient food in a from thick forests. among local communities living with wildlife. farmers can secure enough food for their families and protect smaller area through CA practices then this will potentially << Ensure the flow of community benefits from wildlife- the smaller area of cultivated land more effectively and enable them to protect their fields from livestock and reduce related activities to improve services such as boarding These policy inconsistencies and conflicts are exacerbated by efficiently with HEC mitigation techniques like chilli the need to plough far away from the village. schools and clinics. poor cross-sectoral communication and implementation deterrents. << Investment in monitoring wildlife numbers, population co-ordination, both at the national and district levels. Over the long-term, CA also has the potential to significantly trends and to understand wildlife movements, particularly Responsibility for the implementation of these policies, CA also provides potential to address HWC by reducing the improve livelihoods beyond a reliance on subsistence across international borders and between protected areas regulations and programmes is spread across a broad amount of land required for agriculture and therefore agriculture. FAO has recognized that CA has the potential to and community conserved areas spectrum of institutions leading to fragmented understanding reducing HEC levels at the landscape scale (Songhurst 2012). bring higher prices in emerging niche and “green” markets << Strengthening and improving CBNRM in KAZA through and a lack of implementation (Ecoexist, 2013). One of the main drivers of HEC is land use change and because of the quality and safety of its production and the capacity building of CBOs and promoting good resulting increased competition for space and barriers to environmental services generated by its production governance elephant movement corridors. processes. Establishing organic certification processes or

54 A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. 55 KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures

10.4.5. Abolishment of Compensation Support for in-service training of mid-level managers << Increase and harmonize research that is related to wildlife << The flow of community benefits from such wildlife-related Schemes (particularly on issues related to wildlife management and and communities to inform decisions activities should be ensured, to improve services such as < We propose a gradual removal of the scheme i.e. reducing HWC in particular). Support for CBNRM, particularly on < Partner countries need to apply an adaptive boarding schools and clinics. < the amount paid out on an annual basis for any crops lost, institutional and governance issues so that communities can management approach in addressing HWC problems, < Investment in monitoring wildlife numbers, population and introduction of self-insurance schemes. This contrasts be empowered to conserve wildlife and manage human modifying mitigation tools and methods through trends and to understand wildlife movements, particularly fully the current situation whereby the amount paid out in the wildlife conflicts in a manner that achieves a win-win continuous learning and feedback across international borders and between protected areas < past 5 years has been increasing and communities still feel outcome. Investment in a highly focused and targeted public < Compile, promote and disseminate existing information and community conserved areas < that the compensation is even lower than they expect. relations campaign to inform national decision-makers and on HWC interventions to all levels from communities to < Strengthening and improving CBNRM in KAZA through the general public of the issues concerning wildlife national level decision makers capacity building of CBOs and promoting good < This gradual removal of the scheme can be introduced with management in all the partner countries is needed. < Develop or strengthen policy guidelines for reducing governance < the temporary adoption of Conditional payment of HWC at all levels < Investment in a highly focused and targeted public < compensation. This implies that those farmers engaged in For example, it would be interesting to see if data on HWC < Provision of incentives not to convert land. relations campaign to inform national decision-makers, < mitigation will have a percentage of their lost property being are given back to the communities, and discussions held to < Livestock and wildlife promotion as alternative land uses international conservation organisations and the compensated for. For example, if one is not kraaling his cattle understand the dynamics of the conflict in a following period to cultivation. international general public and decision-makers of the < he will not be paid anything, the same applies to those not and the effectiveness of certain measures. This may help in < Where possible, develop incentive mechanisms for people issues concerning HWC and wildlife management < protecting their crops or leaving near their crops shall not be getting communities more engaged in the management of the to increase benefits from wildlife, while reducing costs < Support for monitoring and data collection that can < compensated for any loss they incur. Those settling illegally in situation as it is essential to communicate; < Establish HWC committees, as appropriate, involving better inform decision-making through: Calculation and elephant corridors should have the same fate as well. interested stakeholders from a variety of sectors to advise quantifying wildlife damage as economic data, quantifying 10.4.7. Publicity and Advocacy management authorities farming area ‘at risk’ in each HWC zone, producing HWC < The process would then culminate in the establishment of a Using various mediums of communication (e.g. theatre) to < Harmonise land-use planning approaches across all maps at different scales suitable as well as comparing pest Community self-insurance schemes. The concept is address rural villagers about HWC is complicated and often sectors species damage to have comparative analysis < < currently in place in Namibia and has been touted to be one politically charged. If a Government agency, with multiple < Develop, as appropriate, long-term plans to manage < Lobby to have issues pertaining to HWC be included in of the most realistic alternatives to the present compensation responsibilities is given the mandate to roll out a new idea, locally overabundant elephant populations in harmony the education curriculum of schools for communities to scheme. The system will deal with issues of conflict resolution misinterpretation by suspicious community members is with national elephant policies learn about such issues. This can be done through the < as well as payments for crop losses but is not centralized. The common. It is important to explain any new initiative and < Enforce anti-poaching to minimize illegal killing of wildlife existing structures in the wildlife departments such as the Conflict Resolution Committees (CRCs), which is the we recommend using a mobile platform such as a purpose which sometimes drives wildlife close to human Environmental Education and Extension Program as well community leadership of traditional authorities, seeks to outfitted overland truck to take a road show to the settlement from thick forests as the Community Extension and Outreach Division or < balance the losses of individual community members against communities one wants to influence. By outfitting, a truck < Planting and harvesting seasons should be synchronised to through NGOs operating in the region. < benefits from wildlife/elephants gained by the communities. with a team of young educators and materials, it is an limit individual risk of crop raiding. < Need to have other mid-high tech methods of reducing < Farmers will then be paid fixed-rates for losses from elephants effective way of spreading the conservation message. Getting < Farms should be consolidated in cultivation zones away HWC in place e.g. where resources permit electric fences or any other wildlife species that have a collective value to people discussing a new initiative may contribute to from elephant corridors and critical ranges could be used. However, a feasibility study is required; < communities, with payments only being made to registered achievement of the many KAZA educational goals . < Alternative, community-based tourism activities should one that takes into account a thorough Cost Benefit members, in the event of such member’s field being be developed in the project area (such as elephant-back Analysis. Where fencing might be extensive, an predated upon. However, such payments will only be made 10.4.8. Coordination of HWC within the safaris; in Zambia’s Livingstone District, one CBO under Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) may be necessary. within a specific laid down framework of rules and conditions chief Mukuni is currently involved in elephant back safari (some kind of constitution), which need be developed by the KAZA TFCA and lion encounters/walking with lions, etc), bird watching community members themselves. Claims that fail to meet Establish a specific multi-sectorial group that is able to deal and walking and horseback safaris. specifications in the constitution will be deemed ineligible for with HWC issues in a way that is most efficient and payment. effective, and is able to coordinate well the various activities, consolidating the data from the different sectors, and as such maximizing the resulting interventions.Improve the dialogue 10.4.6. Support to Data Collection and and communication with communities on issues of HWC16 ; Monitoring Program Landscape level monitoring and the analysis and evaluation of 10.4.9. Training HWC is important in order to develop land use planning and Continue with the various programs of training, to improve predictive mitigation (early warning). All five KAZA countries the technical capacity of the various stakeholders that are have undertaken some form of monitoring, but none have responsible to respond to HWC (Government scouts, as well been as comprehensive and well thought out as event book as communities and others), the understanding on animal used in the Zambezi region, Namibia, and later was adopted behaviour and wildlife management, as well as the general with varying degrees of success in Botswana and Zambia. awareness programs. This will also include reviewing the However, as this consultancy has identified, the data time-frame for the training programme, tailoring them collected are often hard to access for logistical and possibly according to area specific requirements. political reasons. International press exerts great pressure on Government Departments. Support for monitoring and data 10.4.10. Other Interventions collection that can better inform decision-making through: << Ecotourism development: earnings from tourism << Calculation and quantifying wildlife damage as economic particularly in areas within the wildlife range to serve as a data, long-term source of revenue to compensate farmers << Quantifying farming area ‘at risk’ in each HWC zone, suffering from crop damage and livestock loss by << Producing HWC maps at different scales suitable as well as contributing to the self-insurance scheme capital. In << Comparing pest species damage to have comparative addition, trying compensation in terms of kind or food analysis.

supply’s impact need to be determined. © P Sutera 16 This has been undertaken successfully by Resource Africa in the communal lands around the Kruger Park, South Africa.

56 A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. 57 KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures

Interventions << The above interventions need to be constant, and not just occasional campaigns; << There needs to be greater active participation in the Strategy activities by the various responsible parties; << Introduce other, innovative mechanisms and approaches on dealing with HWC; << Work with fishermen on fishing techniques that may reduce conflicts; << Management committees should have better logistics capacity; << Increase the number of scouts where there is need; << Introduce trained hunters in certain areas to resolve dangerous problematic animals (not applicable to Botswana); << Produce and implement strategy documents on the management of HWC 11 Monitoring and Evaluation Framework Equipment << Equip ground teams with appropriate weapons, ammunition, uniforms and other logistics, to scare away animals; 11.1. Current Monitoring and Evaluation << Continue with the program of placing signs on areas of conflict; << Provide means of transportation (e.g. bikes, boats and vehicles); Discussions with several stakeholders showed that there are currently no robust Procedures real time reporting structures of HWC incidents across the KAZA. Where << Simplify procedures for licensing game farms, and harvesting croc eggs (especially in Zimbabwe); << Infrastructure improvement available, the data are not easily accessible and are not up to date or are not << Continue with the program of placing fences where appropriate and removal where inappropriate; << Continue with the program of construction of water sources and river pools; simplified into statistics defining the magnitude of the damage caused by wild-

Funding life. There is a need to develop and maintain an updated database containing << Increase the funding sources, by having not only further donor partners, but also a set budget from the Government allocated and designated for this category. the broadest array of records documenting the type and location of the incidents. Such a database would provide a detailed overview of the impact on local 10.4.11. Forming Partnerships for Implementation of HWC This selection of partners for the KAZA TFCA to work with and ultimately fund, is complicated. We interviewed populations; better identify which geographical zones are more vulnerable to representatives from many organisations doing useful research and implementation. To suggest working with one elephant group, for example, over another or one predator group over another, is not productive. We simply reviewed the organisations HWC and which species are commonly involved in the conflict. that responded to our requests for an interview.

Criteria used in sampling partners in the Training Needs Assessment (TNA) exercise included the following: << Project demonstration sites especially those currently working on HWC mitigation and offering some trainings << CBOs that are part of the KAZA TFCA landscape. << NGOs that have trained communities before as well as currently training communities to consolidate what has been done e.g. Ecoexist Project in Botswana, Angola’s Acadir, Namibia’s IRDNC, Zambia’s Green Rural African Development and Zimbabwe’s Lion Project. << NGOs that are facilitating CBNRM activities at community level such as Zimbabwe’s Campfire Association << Government Departments that are directly facilitating community initiatives in the partner countries e.g. Agriculture and Forestry departments. << NGO’s that are directly involved with elephant and people issues such as the Ecoexist Project, Elephants for Africa & Living with Elephants and Elephants without Borders.

58 A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. 59 KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures

As a result, it would ensure adequate use of resources, help identify high-risk areas and allow effective responses to these. The categorisation and quantification of the level of incidence is generally carried out through common indicators such as the number of people maimed by wildlife, or livestock kills in a year or the annual economic loss. However, the use of this kind of information is constructive only if it is taken in the context of the specific social, economic and ecological dimensions of the study area; for example the number of livestock killed over a period of time is an inconsistent figure and it would be more informative if it were related to the total family livestock holding or total village units. The quantification of the economic losses should also be related to annual household income or the economic value of the family holdings (cattle, agricultural fields). Information gathered should include: dimension of the focal area (village, ward, district), number of people injured or killed over a fixed period of time, wild animal mortality induced by humans as well as species responsible or suspected to be involved 12. recommendations for Sustainable Financing of HWC in the conflict. 12.1. Establishment of KAZA TFCA HWC Mitigation Fund Appropriate research should also take into account a family’s land tenure, crops grown and yields, damage calculated as percentage of crop loss per hectare or percentage of crop loss per annual production; livestock ownership and percentage of domestic animals killed and their current market price. With the aim of providing a complete scenario, it should be specified This form is the simplest one. The Cash Fund receives money from donors, fines, which protection measures were adopted, the time and money spent on defending the property, any additional damage to it (pipelines, fences, etc.) and any suggested measures to reduce the losses. royalties or any other source, either in one instalment or in several tranches,

In the KAZA TFCA, many ecological variables influence HWC. It becomes prudent to make each case very specific, for instance and spends it according to the availability of money and approval of projects. All wildlife density, water, natural prey and forage availability and quality (abundance and distribution), competition with other species and these need to prioritisation. spending is on a grant basis. Project monitoring is encouraged by the Fund administration. When Funds are exhausted, either the Fund is replenished or, if it 11.2. Understand, Monitor and Evaluate the Problem was designed as a Sinking Fund, it ends its operations. This is often the case with It is essential to have accurate spatial and temporal geo-referenced information about when and where the conflict is occurring. This understanding, concurrent with implementation of appropriate measures, should lead to a better focus on target areas and debt counterpart Funds. the most relevant species. Simple monitoring and evaluation schemes exist across the KAZA which need to be standardized and then be adapted to local circumstances and information gathered can be used to draw up a strategy to combat the problem. The monitoring framework proposed aims to answer a number of questions, should be having both the impact (quantitative) and progress (qualitative) monitoring indicators.

Generic questions to be answered by the framework include: << Are we working in the right location? << How severe is HWC? << Is our work making a difference? << Are we doing the right things in the right place? << Is HWC increasing, stable or decreasing over time? << When has an intervention succeeded? When can it be called it is a success or failure? << Is a new technique /tool/ procedure, working? << What technique/tool/procedure works under what circumstances (ecological, socio- cultural, economic, and political)?

60 A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. 61 KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures

12.1.2. Endowment Fund costs of living with wildlife. Another example is the initiative called Wildlife Friendly http://wildlifefriendly.org that certifies The Endowment Funds invest the Funds received in an interest-bearing form such as bonds, private bank accounts, real estate, products as supporting conservation. etc. and spend only interest earned on those investments. This form trades cash availability, which of course is considerably smaller than in the case of the Cash Fund, against the establishment of a long-term financial investment for environmental conservation. Moreover, the establishment of administrative bodies is also a more long-term affair. However, this kind of Fund 12.3.2. Direct Payments for Maintaining Wildlife Habitat requires a minimal financial critical mass to be worthwhile. If the capital invested is too small, the interest earned will be In essence, this would involve calculating the “carrying costs” of having wildlife in a farming area and soliciting direct payments insignificant and not worth the trouble. from (Western) wildlife lovers to keep the population above the minimum required for mere reproduction of the species. Ideally such a system would have several hundreds of thousands of donations or levies from tourists signing monthly stop-orders 12.1.3. Revolving Funds for small amounts with some of the money used to contribute to the proposed self-insurance cover to individual farmers who The Revolving Fund disburses the cash in the same way as the Cash Fund but it does so on a loan basis. A long-term suffer wildlife damage to crops or infrastructure, and the rest to support an on-going programme of work aimed at reducing financial mechanism is therefore established in the same way as the Endowment Fund. Here again, there is a trade-off, this time HWC. Setting up such a scheme would probably involve spending a considerable amount on recruiting donors. On the other between investment security and immediate outreach to target groups. Assuming that loans made in the context of the Fund’s hand, it would have the added benefit of creating a large network of potential clients for the branding strategy outlined above. environmental aims are not as secure an investment as government bonds or real estate, the Funds trade greater availability of cash for its projects against a higher degree of insecurity.

12.2. Recommended Type of Fund None of these alternatives is better or superior to the other (Mikitin, 1995). Each one fits a particular situation that should be carefully analysed. Among these deciding factors, one can note the following: the immediate financial absorption capacity of the NGOs, government agencies, and communities; the amount of funds available; the experience NGOs or state agencies have with Revolving Funds; the relationship between the NGO community and the government; the situation of the local financial market, etc.

Important factors for establishing a Human Wildlife Conflict Mitigation Fund << The HWC issue to be addressed is significant, and appropriate actions to respond are long term and can be met with the resource flows an HWC Mitigation fund could produce. << There is active and broad-based government support for creating a mixed, public-private sector mechanism that will function beyond direct government control. << There is a critical mass of people from diverse sectors – government, NGOs, academic and private sectors, donor agencies – who can work together despite different approaches to nature conservation and sustainable development. << There is a basic fabric of legal and financial practices and supporting institutions (including banking, auditing and contracting) in which the majority of people have confidence. << There is a legal framework that permits establishing the Fund, and tax laws that allow it to be exempt from taxes. << There are mechanisms to involve a broad set of stakeholders in the design process, and willingness by these stakeholders to use them. << One or more mentors (e.g., another more experienced fund or an experienced international NGO) are available to provide technical support to the new Fund. << There are realistic prospects for attracting a level of capital sufficient for the Fund to support a significant programme while keeping operating costs to a reasonable percentage. << There is an effective demand for the fund’s products, i.e. a client community interested in and capable of carrying out the mitigation activities on the scale envisaged. << If one of the first four conditions is missing, it is suggested to investigate other possible financial mechanisms. Some of the other conditions might not be met but if so, efforts should be made to remedy the situation as soon as possible.

12.3. Using Wildlife as a Marketing Tool

12.3.1. Wildlife Branded Products The concept of wildlife branded products has been around for many years and projects across the continent are taking advantage of the expose and income it can produce. For example, the “Elephant Pepper” range of chilli products showed how innovative eco-marketing strategies based on the argument that “these products are special because they help to conserve threatened wildlife species” enable increasing of sales. To achieve the desired conservation impacts it is further necessary to translate that appeal into premium prices, and to ensure that producers know they are getting a premium because they put up with elephants.

It is also important to find ways of targeting specific consumer groups who may be swayed by such arguments, which would suggest going after people with an interest in elephants and introducing them to the products, rather than the reverse (i.e. pushing the products and using “elephant-friendly” as additional value). A certain percentage of funds coming from such enterprise would then be channelled towards the mitigation of conflict or is distributed amongst the communities bearing the

62 A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. 63 KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures © P Sutera

Appendix

Appendix 1: Situational analysis of member countries

Appendix 2: Recommended Species-Specific hwc Mitigation Measures

Appendix 3: Mechanisms for the Exchange of Experiences

Appendix 4: Photographs © P. Sutera © P. Sutera © P. Sutera Appendix 5: Construction of a Barrier for Protection Against Crocodiles © P. Sutera

64 A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. A1 KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures

Appendix 1 Situational Analysis of Member Countries Angola Introduction and Background Angola lacks reliable and up-to-date information on the status of most of its wildlife population as well as the extent of HWC (Ron & Golan 2010). In 2006, the elephant population in Angola was estimated at 2,384 (Chase & Griffin, 2005; Blanc et al., 2007) and this could now be close to 7,500 in 2010 (Chase pers. comm.) mainly within southeastern Angola. The Kuando Kubango province has the largest block of protected forest areas i.e. Luenge National Park and Mavengue National Park that were formerly two nature reserves and four game reserves in southern Angola and shares international boundaries with Namibia and Zambia as illustrated in figure 2. The KAZA TFCA area of the Angolan component incorporates Mucusso Game Reserve (formerly Coutada) that is approximately 21,300km² of land and adjoins the Kubango (Kavango) River and Namibia to the south, and the Cuito River to the west. People also inhabit the Mucusso Reserve. The largest human settlements occur in two areas of the reserve: in the south, where a series of small villages line the banks of the Kubango and Cuito Rivers, and in the north, where the Likua settlement aligns the Lumuna River. Most agricultural activity occurs along the Kubango and Cuito Rivers. Other human settlements appear to be small in scale. The reserve overlaps with two municipalities, Dirico and Rivungu, and five communas Xamavera, Dirico, Mucusso, Luiana and Galangue. Only the Mucusso communa is wholly within the boundaries of the Mucusso Reserve. After the civil war, both people and wildlife (particularly elephants) started re-colonizing these areas (Conservation International, 2010).

The end of the civil war has probably provided the requisite security for elephants and other wildlife to return to southeast Angola despite the heavy presence of landmines in the region. However, such surveys are yet to be conducted on other wildlife species although plans are underway. Cross border movement of elephants to Angola from Botswana, Namibia and Zambia have now been confirmed (Chase, Curtice & Griffin 2009) and from the course of these movements, conflict manifests. Wildlife poaching is prevalent in the Angolan section of KAZA. This is mainly due to inadequate law enforcement. Due to insecurity, wildlife, particularly elephants tend to move away from insecure deep parts of the forest to human Figure 1: Map showing the extent of the KAZA TFCA component in Angola settlements and cause conflict in the process.

Mucusso, Dirico and Menongue residents expressed concern about HWC with respect to three animals: elephants, crocodiles and hippos. Crocodiles and hippos make use of the river dangerous. Residents of these areas say that the crocodile population grew during the years of war. Prior to independence, the Government allowed selective culling of crocodiles to limit crocodile numbers in the river. Mucusso residents fear these animals when crossing the river by boat, and when collecting river water. Elephant intrusion into cropland is a major problem for the local people. Elephants access the river along the Mucusso border at three primary locations. In two of these locations, elephants pass through cropland to reach the river. 18 Elephants migrate to the Kavango River in Mucusso from the forests to the North, and from Namibia. Elephants most likely enter Angola to access the river because Angola sites are conducive to river access.

Causes of Conflict in Angola << Elephants moving into Angola from neighbouring countries i.e. Zambia, Namibia as well as Botswana. << Human encroachment returning as refugees into sparsely settled areas adjacent to Mucusso Reserve and the Luiana ecosystem. << Subsistence agriculture along the main river leading to elephant, crocodile and hippo attacks. << Lack of defence of crops and livestock by farmers. << Lack of proper land tenure and planning. << Human population rising at an annual rate of close to 4%. << A limited recent experience of ‘living with wildlife’ and possibly a growing elephant density in the area.

Types and Nature of Human Wildlife Conflicts Angola experiences mainly four types of HWCs that include crop damage, attack on livestock (cattle), human deaths and injuries and damage of food stores. In the Mucusso Coutada (hunting reserve) that is one of seven areas designated for protection in the province of Kuando Kubango, over 600 conflict incidences were recorded between 2008 and 2012 from various wildlife (Antonio Chipita, pers. comm). In this Savannah ecosystem, the main crops damaged include millet, maize, groundnuts, sorghum and sweet potatoes. However, hippos and crocodiles are the most problematic animals alongside elephants. Hippos raid crops, injure and or kill fishermen as well as people harnessing water from the river. Crocodiles ambush livestock grazing and drinking from the river as well.

18 The three locations where elephants access the river include the main village of Mucusso, the village that lies directly west of the Luiana road, which is the seat of the Mbukushu King, and at the village that lies parallel to the former Coutada office. Elephant access at the main village Figure 2: Map showing conflict hotspots in Angola. of Mucusso poses less of a problem, because residents there do not rely upon agriculture as a means of survival. In the other two locations, communities experience significant problems with elephant intrusion into cropland.

A2 A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. A3 KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures

Spatial and Temporal Patterns of Human Wildlife Conflicts and Conflict Hotspots Botswana The documentation of the intensity of HWC in Angola is an ongoing concern, as there are no formal reports. Anecdotal The Botswana component of the KAZA TFCA hosts numerous natural and cultural resources that are of critical importance to information summarises the intensity as shown in Table 1 where crop damage is very high. There are no official records about regional tourism and economic growth, as well as the creation of sustainable benefits to the region and its people the number of people or wildlife injured or killed every year because of conflict. Some attacks on people occur on the farms (www.kavangozambezi.org/botswana). These include the Okavango Delta which is a Ramsar Site, the largest in-land Delta when farmers are guarding their crops at night. However, most attacks are accidental with unsuspecting people falling victim in the world; the Makgadikgadi Pans, the largest salt pans in the world; various Wildlife Management Areas and the world mostly whenever elephants stray out of their range. The conflict hotspots are mainly along the rivers where most subsistence renowned Chobe National Park as shown in figure 4 below. farmers grow their crops and fish as shown in figure 3. Introduction and Background Table 1: Types and intensity of human wildlife conflicts experienced in Angola. In Botswana HWC varies according to geography, land-use patterns, human behaviour, the habitat and behaviour of animals. There is a need for better understanding and awareness of the nature and complexity of factors contributing to HWC human wildlife conflicts experienced in Angola in Botswana, including climatic factors, land-use, agricultural practices and wildlife management initiatives as well as mitigation measures in use.

VERY- Type of conflict LOW HIGH There is considerable government commitment to conserve and protect wildlife and their habitats. In support of “sustainable HIGH development”, there is recognition of the importance of the natural environment in the lives of Batswana19 . Recent increased numbers and range combined with increased development, human footprint and population, for example, may have Crop damage incidental consequences of increasing human-elephant interface and interactions, which need to be managed to maintain a healthy balance between the need for socio-economic development and protection of the natural environment. Livestock attack The Department of Wildlife and National Parks (DWNP) has long realized the growing urgency of HWCs in Botswana Food store damage particularly HEC. In fact, the DWNP has implemented many individual programs to mitigate specific HWC challenges. However, the DWNP also recognized that a comprehensive plan based on available knowledge had to be designed if this Killing and injuring of people and wildlife conflict is to be reduced, human livelihoods enhanced and conservation is to succeed in the end. The Government of Botswana through the Northern Botswana Human Wildlife Coexistence (NBHWC) Project saw this as a significant issue and directed the DWNP to design a set of concrete, project level strategies. In addition, there are a number of NGOs (e.g. the The type and intensity of conflict varies between the areas such as Mucusso, Kalai, Dirico, Menongue and Temangue and there Ecoexist Project) working in partnership with DWNP to understand and address the root causes of conflicts and attempting to is a slight variation in habitat types. People living closer to rivers reported crocodile attacks on livestock. High incidences of find collaborative solutions between communities, Government departments and other stakeholders to reduce the problems. elephant attacks on people came from Mucusso area as people live in the former Coutada now a National Park. Also due to limited food availability for the elephants in the savannah ecosystem, elephants are more likely to pull down food stores than in the forest where food is plenty and readily available.

HWC is prevalent across most of the wildlife range forming the Angolan KAZA TFCA component but with varying intensity and exhibiting both spatial and temporal variations. The areas around Mucusso in the Mucusso ecosystem appear to experience high conflict incidences and thus forms part of the conflict hot spots. The ecosystem has all three-problem wildlife species (elephant, hippo and crocodile). Hippo and crocodile conflict is throughout the year whereas conflict with elephants appears to be seasonal. Elephants in this area disperse further into the hinterland during the wet season as they can find water almost everywhere. In the dry season, conflict is severe as they come down to the river from the forest on a daily basis in need of water. Given that most human settlements are along the river, elephants have to negotiate this “hard edge” on a regular basis making conflict inevitable.

Past Conflict Mitigation Measures In Angola, traditional ways of mitigating conflict are the most common and this includes the use of fire to scare away elephants and hippos, banging tins and drums and in some cases the use of trenches around fields.

Current Mitigation Measures Not much has changed in the manner conflict mitigation is being practised from the traditional setup. Current methods include use of fire, banging of tins and drums, the use of torches. Community based conflict mitigation (CBCM) methods were introduced in some parts of Mucusso around 2008 but without further support, the methods seem to have died out. These included among other things the use of chilli-based deterrents to reduce HEC (Karidozo, 2008).

Applicable Policy Angola inherited a great deal of environmental legislation (acts and decrees) and decisions, or orders (e.g. on the establishment of protected areas) from the colonial era (Jones, 2004). The environmental legislative tools influenced the interaction of humans and natural resources especially wild animals. Despite attaining independence in 1975, Angola’s legislation remained out-dated. The new thinking in environmental legislation is developing and adoption and enforcement is improving since the mid-1990s. A number of decrees and acts that take into consideration the effects of HWC. However, addressing HWC is not dealt with explicitly by any policy document. These include Angolan Constitutional Law (No. 23/92 of September 1992) and Environmental Framework Act (No. 5/98 of 19 June 1999. However, some of the colonial statutes are still in place while others are under review, amended, revoked or repealed. Figure 3: Map showing the extent of the KAZA TFCA in Botswana

19 An interesting reference here is http://voicesofafrica.co.za/botswanan-batswana-its-complicated/ A4 A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. A5 KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures

Causes of Conflict in Botswana Spatial and Temporal Patterns of HWCs and Conflict Hotspots A set of continental trends has contributed to the escalation of HWC across the KAZA TFCA component of Botswana. These In northern Botswana, as has been identified elsewhere in Africa, crop damage is seasonal, exhibiting a peak of activity when can be grouped into human population growth, land-use transformation, habitat loss, degradation and fragmentation and the crops approach maturity as they are more palatable and nutritious at this stage. However, in Botswana’s Chobe enclave growing elephant population as well as growing interest in ecotourism and increasing access to nature reserves, increasing and the Okavango where Molopo (flood plain) agriculture is widespread, dry season crop raiding is also common as elephants livestock populations, climatic factors and stochastic (e.g. flooding) events. and other wildlife raid these fields when they go into the delta to drink water (Songhurst et al 2015). Livestock depredations are usually throughout the year although during the dry seasons conflict is heightened. All areas in proximity to national parks and Although human population growth in Botswana is marginal compared to neighbouring states, information from Chobe and forestry areas where there are animals are considered as conflict hotspots. Figure 5 below illustrates some of the known conflict Tawana land boards shows a significant increase in people settling in the Chobe enclave and along the Okavango delta as hotspots. well as establishing several new fields and cattle posts in well-known wildlife corridors leading to encroachment into wildlife habitats. This is particularly common in Northern Botswana where 99% of Botswana’s elephants reside. Between Kasane and Past Conflict Mitigation Measures Kazungula along the Chobe and Zambezi River fronts, there is increasing settlement that has impeded access for elephants to In the past, the predominant measures of conflict mitigation were more or less the same as the surrounding countries. Famers the river and leads to conflict with local residents. are mostly left up to their own devices that include the range of traditional ‘drive-them-away’ techniques including fire and banging on drums or barrels to scare raiding wildlife away. Furthermore, lethal control was and is still used occasionally but the Types and Nature of Human Wildlife Conflicts practice has been on the decline over the past number of years. The main type of conflict in Botswana is crop raiding and livestock depredations. The main crops destroyed by elephants include maize, sorghum, millet and groundnuts. Livestock killing is widespread and this has a huge toll on the country’s Current Mitigation Measures economy, as the beef industry is a critical economic sector. The spreading of foot and mouth disease from buffalo to cattle is Effective planning that includes an elaborately designed and implemented integrated national policy on wildlife. There has also another form of HWC prevalent in Botswana. Human injuries and deaths occur but are relatively rare. been an increased awareness in securing key and sensitive wildlife areas such as corridors and core habitats both at the national/regional scale e.g. KAZA TFCA and at a finer micro-level land-use planning scale e.g. LUCIS (collaboration between There is sufficient evidence to show that the elephant population in northern Botswana is part of a larger population linked to Tawana Land Board, Ecoexist Project and SAREP). Encouraging setting up of individual defendable clusters as well as training Zimbabwe, Namibia, Angola and Zambia (Chase, 2006). Cooperation is vital between all of these countries particularly if the of communities on several mitigation measures as shown during the Northern Botswana Human Wildlife Coexistence project approach of developing wildlife dispersal corridors is followed and if adequate measures are to be taken regarding the (NBHWC) implemented by the DWNP. Synchronising cattle calving down to minimise vulnerability to attack in hotspots has mitigation of HWC. been mentioned in the Central District of Botswana and the provision of alternative water points for both communities/livestock separated from wildlife has been mooted as a method of conflict mitigation in the drier arid areas. Compensation forms the backbone of the mitigation methods in use in Botswana. Exclusion fences including the buffalo/veterinary fences and traditional as well as commercial are used extensively to separate communities, crops and livestock (Ferguson & Hanks, 2010). Some of the fences are fitted with early warning devices, both simple and sophisticated, including electric offsets/hotwire, fenced off cattle grazing schemes and predator proof fences. The DWNP occasionally employs helicopters to herd buffalo and elephant back into PAs. Crocodile fences are also common in places where the Okavango River passes through. A number of repellence options such as chilli growing, chilli fencing, burning chilli bricks are currently in use in Chobe District, Okavango Panhandle and many other parts of Botswana. As part of the NBHWC project, beehive fences (King 2010, 2012) were trailed as a deterrent for crop-raiding elephants but the initiative was abandoned due to poor colonisation of the hives.

Other standard traditional tools include: << Using torches. << Dogs to warn of pending intrusion. << Donkeys used to alert people of approaching cheetah and brown hyena << Disturbance shooting i.e. firing of firearms over problem animals << Good livestock and crop minding has been observed where livestock owners mandated to accompany livestock during the day and kraal or animals at night. Lions and in some cases elephants have been trans-located. << Limited lethal control i.e. destruction of specific dangerous animals is also practiced.

Applicable Policy In Botswana, the emphasis on responsibility to mitigate against problem animals rests on government empowering Problem Animal Control (PAC) units in which communities are expected to play their part in mitigating the conflict. CBNRM programs are in general stalled with an unwillingness to devolve control to local people and of late total compensation packages are offered by government provided good livestock husbandry and crop mindedness are demonstrated.

Several policies and legislative instruments are relevant to HWC issues and the strategies that can be used to prevent it. In this section, we provide a brief review of the relevant legal and policy framework related to HWC and its associated sectors that Botswana is currently working within and is guided by.

This policy review is, therefore, also meant to identify these constraints in the policy and legislative framework, in relation to cross sectorial conflicts, information gaps and impediments to implementation, and to highlight opportunities to inform future Figure 4: Spatial patterns of human-elephant conflict in Botswana 1994-2002 (Braack, & Smuts 2006) policy decision making.

A6 A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. A7 KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures

Wildlife Conservation Policy of 1986 (Department of Wildlife and National Parks) live on the land are the ones that bear the actual costs of living with wildlife, but they seldom share equally in the benefits from This Wildlife Conservation Policy (WCP) deals with the utilization of wildlife resources in areas outside PAs and the proper wildlife. management and utilization of wildlife resources. It aims at continued harvesting of wildlife resources and a fair distribution of benefits. Special attention is given to the needs of rural people, promoting the principle of ‘wildlife management with sustained Causes of Conflict in Namibia utilization’, encouraging the development of a commercial wildlife industry. Namibia, particularly the Caprivi Strip, cuts through the middle of the KAZA TFCA and is where most of the important wildlife corridors are found. Its long boundary makes it particularly susceptible to HWC. Commercial hunting of wildlife has been However, its incentive or disincentive to implement is that it makes provision for the zoning and protection of wildlife and extremely important in the development of the conservancies (Naidoo et al 2016). Conflict is particularly severe along the river migration corridors in land-use planning in order to protect wildlife, and aims at distributing the benefits fairly with special systems that flow through the Caprivi (now Zambezi region) and the high densities of wildlife and unplanned human settlement attention to the needs of rural people. Land-use planning is in place for PAs for wildlife preservation, and for conservation and makes conflict particularly severe in the eastern Caprivi. Land-use planning is at the root of much of the conflict in Namibia. utilization of wildlife in Wildlife Management Areas (WMAs) around PA and wildlife corridors and licensed hunting in Issues that have an impact on levels of HWC include: Controlled Hunting Areas (CHAs). This planning gives effect to CITES and other international conventions for the protection of << Settlement of wildlife corridors, fauna and flora. << Scattered agricultural lands that creates a mosaic that is impractical to defend, << Living in and adjacent to PA boundaries, Constraints and / or opportunities that it has to take into account are that land-use planning must accord wildlife resources a << Herding livestock within or too close to PA boundaries, position that reflects its considerable economic significance. It also makes provision for benefit through wildlife utilisation from << Commuting between villages, areas where HWC exists, in order to offset impact. However, no hunting licenses are allocated in Botswana anymore. A review << Poor understanding of animal behaviour by local people (e.g. how problem animals approach or avoid human settlement, of the Wildlife Conservation Policy, the Wildlife Conservation and National Parks Act and Associated Regulations in 2008 crops, water points and livestock both during the day and at night), concluded that there was a need to reduce HWC through a number of approaches. The following HWC relevant options were << Fishing and wild harvesting, explored: separation of wildlife from human activities through fencing out of wildlife in agricultural areas; creation of buffer << Access to water by animals/ wild and domestic, zones between PAs and communal areas like WMAs and game ranches; problem animal handling, including elephant << Molapo farming (ploughing along a river flood plain). management; effective integrated land-use planning; and innovative community based approaches/strategies, like chilli plants for elephant control. It was also recognised that there is also potential for introduction of community-based compensation in the form of insurance schemes, paid for in part by wildlife revenue. Other relevant policies are explained in full in Appendix 1. Types and Nature of Human Wildlife Conflicts << Crop damage << Livestock predation Namibia << Damage to property e.g. structures, water points, fences (both rural and urban) << Direct and perceived attacks on persons Introduction and Background << Challenges on game fences surrounding wildlife enterprises Conflict between wildlife and the Namibian people is a significant and well-documented problem. HWC is particularly << All standing crops including vegetable gardens damage occurring from direct feeding and trampling ranging from slight to common on the communal lands in northern Namibia, where elephants, for example, destroy crops and damage water total destruction installations, and large carnivores regularly prey on domestic livestock. These conflicts result in financial losses and disrupt the << Conflict at waterpoints and riverbanks lives of the local people. CBNRM programmes in Namibia and the emergence of communal conservancies have contributed to growing wildlife populations. Although local communities on communal land and owners of freehold land benefit from wildlife, Spatial and Temporal Patterns of Human Wildlife Conflicts and Conflict Hotspots the increasing numbers of many wildlife populations lead to high levels of HWC. The individual farmers and pastoralists that Conflict between wildlife and people is most pronounced in northern Namibia. The review of the dynamics of HWC will therefore focus on the Caprivi, Kavango and parts of Otjozondjupa. In Namibia the characteristics of HWC is highly variable, because of contrasting ecological, socio-economic, and land-use conditions. This variation complicates the use of one standardised mitigation system. Available reports state that the frequency of HWC appears to be higher in the Caprivi Region than elsewhere in Namibia. Livestock losses remained the most important impact of HWC on the local communities. Damages to crops occurred more frequently in the Caprivi and attacks on humans, primarily by crocodiles and hippopotamuses, occurred mostly in the Kavango and Caprivi Regions. When all records for Namibia were assessed, elephants, spotted hyenas, lions, and leopards were responsible for the majority of HWCs.

Past Conflict Mitigation Measures As in the other KAZA countries, rural people have had to resort to traditional drive-them-away methods. This also includes efforts by the MET, Game Guards and local councils to repel animals from fields. << Predominantly lethal control using legal and illegal means. << Toxicants. << Steel leg hold traps. << Direct hunting by MET or commercial operators.

Current Mitigation Measures Namibia has been the most proactive of the KAZA countries on addressing HWC. The self-assurance scheme (discussed later), strong community involvement in mitigation and practical monitoring has enabled the people to benefit from living with wildlife. Namibia has done this through: << Effective land-use planning. << Design and implementation of an integrated national policy on wildlife. << Development of conservancies that help to offset the costs of living alongside PAs. << Securing key and sensitive wildlife areas such as corridors and core habitats. << Encouraging farmers to set up defendable clusters of fields. << Training of communities and trialling plots of new mitigation methods. << Synchronising cattle calving down to minimise vulnerability to attack. Figure 5: Map showing the extent of KAZA TFCA in Namibia.

A8 A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. A9 KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures

<< Providing alternative water points for both communities/livestock separated from wildlife. Causes of Conflict in Zambia << Financial assistance to new developing wildlife ventures that alleviate HWC and improve community perception. In the areas of Zambia that have wildlife, it is super-abundant and often human settlement has grown unchecked around << Exclusion fences- traditional and commercial; some fitted with early- warning devices/ both simple and sophisticated, some of Zambia’s most iconic wildlife areas. For example, lack of urban land-use planning and implementation has made including electric offsets/hotwire. Livingstone one of the hotspots for conflict with all species. Central Government directives are often ignored in the remote << Crocodile and Hippo fences. areas surrounding wildlife areas and settlement often does not take the needs of wildlife into consideration. Poor planning and << Chemical repellent options . implementation includes: << Passive options such as chilli growing, chilli grease, burning chilli bricks. << Occupation of corridors, << Active options such as dogs in particular the Anatolian breed, and donkeys. << Scattered agricultural lands, << Explosive bangers made from fertilizer. << Living in WMAs and adjacent to PA boundaries, << Good crop minding. << Herding livestock too close to WMAs, corridor and PA boundaries, << Relocation options for lion and leopard largely failed as the individual returned to their capture site. << Commuting between villages at night, << Limited lethal control. << Poor understanding of animal behaviour, << PAC/trophy hunting practiced. << Understanding how animals approach or avoid human settlement, crops and livestock, both during the day and at night, << Desire for game meat, Applicable Policy Namibia’s attainment of independence from South African rule in 1990 opened space for legislative and policy reforms typified Types and Nature of Human Wildlife Conflicts by, inter alia, the introduction of innovative ideas on an inclusive CBNRM approach which resonated with the new << Crop damage. government’s policies seeking to remove discrimination and empower rural communities through the decentralisation of << Livestock killing and maiming. control over wildlife and related natural resources and in the process also alleviate rural poverty (Jones, 1999). In Namibia, the << Damage to property both rural and urban. reform of policy and legislation was informed by global ideas on common property resources management, practical << Direct and perceived attacks on persons. experience from the implementation of earlier pilot projects and lessons derived from Zimbabwe’s Communal Areas << Challenges on game fences surrounding some wildlife enterprises. Management Programme for Indigenous Resources (CAMPFIRE). << Spatial and temporal patterns of human wildlife conflicts and conflict hotspots << In private conservancies, animals are privately owned and managed. << Human Wildlife Self Reliance Scheme (HWSRS) and CBNRM programs are functional. The conflict hotspots in general terms are around densely settled areas such as Livingstone and Sesheke and most of this is conflict with elephants coming to the river courses to drink or hippos leaving to forage at night in agricultural lands. Conflict Namibia’s conservancies have an overall beneficial effect on household welfare and are a significant promotional tool for with crocodiles is of course along rivers, particularly the Zambezi where people get their water, fish and water their livestock. Namibia as a country and a tourism destination. While cash benefits are limited, communities enjoy many important Reports suggest that lions and other predators are the cause of conflict reports in the areas between the Zambezi and the Kafue intangible (non-cash) benefits such as meat, community infrastructure etc. Equally important gains include the strengthening National Park (Lines, 2015). The area around Sioma Ngwezi National Park has been the focus of investigations into movement of local institutions and governance, women’s empowerment and great community cohesion. This programme is among the and mitigation of crop raiding elephants to the high levels of conflict there. (von Gerhardt et al.,. 2013; Murphy, 2009) most successful efforts by developing nations to decentralise natural resource management and simultaneously combat poverty. There is considerable opportunity for conservancies to become an engine for economic growth in the northern rural areas of Namibia. However, tourism-based growth potentials within the conservancies are limited. Zambia Introduction and Background Zambia is a nation blessed with extraordinary bounty in terms of wildlife. Its people have benefitted but also suffered from conflict. A wave of unchecked poaching in the 1980s saw huge numbers of elephants and rhinos being wiped out across the country.

Elephant populations throughout Zambia were severely depleted by a wave of illegal hunting which began in the late 1970s. Between 1981 and 1985, Zambia may have lost 100,000 elephants (Martin, 1986). Despite a hunting ban in 1981 and the listing of the Zambian elephant population on Appendix I of CITES, elephants continued to decline in most parts of Zambia. AfESG (1998) estimated the population as 15,873 animals (‘definite’ estimate). The south-west corner of Zambia was not exempt from this holocaust.

Chase (2004) carried out a survey of Sioma Ngwezi National Park and its immediate environs and estimated 1,212 elephants, of which the majority were in the national park (1,099). The authors remark that the population does not appear to have increased since the last survey, which estimated 1,187 elephants in 1991 (Tembo, 1995). They attribute the status quo to high levels of illegal hunting; human settlement along the Kwando River that is preventing Botswana’s dispersing elephants from reaching Sioma Ngwezi and to veterinary fences also constraining movements.

DG (2004) shows a discontinuous elephant range in south-western Zambia with no links between Sioma Ngwezi and the nearby Kafue National Park. Recently large numbers of elephant are being seen along the Zambezi from Livingstone westwards to the point where the borders of Botswana, Namibia, Zambia and Zimbabwe meet.

In response, projects like ADMADE21 in the 1980s and later COMOCO22 , have pioneered CBNRM in southern Africa and the system of Wildlife Management Areas, similar to Namibia’s conservancy program, has benefitted many Zambians and helped reduce illegal hunting.

21 USAID/Zambia works with the Zambia Ministry of Tourism to promote community-based natural resources management in Game Management Areas surrounding Zambia’s national parks through the Administrative Design for Management (ADMADE) project. Figure 6: Map illustrating the conflict hotspots in Zambia

22COMACO Community Markets for Conservation http://itswild.org A10 A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. A11 KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures

Community questionnaires indicated a sharp gradient away from the edge of PAs and interconnecting corridors of HWC Zimbabwe damage, with crops nearest the PAs being the most challenged and effectively protecting others further away as shown in figure 6. Introduction and Background Zimbabwe has a long history of dealing with HWC and many of the most innovative responses to it have had their genesis in Past Conflict Mitigation Measures the Government wildlife department or the CAMPFIRE project. As the CBNRM projects mentioned in the Zambia and Namibia sections, CAMPFIRE linked benefits from wildlife as a way to offset the costs of living with wild animals. Much of the Like the other countries, particularly Zimbabwe, famers use traditional methods to deter wildlife. Many Zambians also have infrastructure needed to make the CAMPFIRE project function is now not in place in much of Zimbabwe. weapons and use them to defend themselves, and to hunt. Predominantly lethal control includes: << Old firarms << Toxicants << Steel leg hold traps

Current Mitigation Measures << Effective planning in some areas. << Design and implementation of an integrated national policy on wildlife (on going). << Including WMA to offset costs from wildlife alongside PAs. << Securing key and sensitive wildlife areas such as corridors and core habitats. << No direct compensation offered however, communities living in hot spots living in and against WMAs and PAs are benefited from trophy hunting in a CAMFIRE style of arrangement until recently. << NGOs have been encouraging setting up of individual defendable clusters of fields, training of communities, and trialling of plots with low-tech mitigation methods in Livingstone and other towns on the Zambezi. (http://www.gradinternational.org) << Providing alternative water points for both communities/livestock separated from wildlife. << Financial assistance to new developing wildlife ventures that alleviate HWC and improve community perception << Exclusion fences. << Independent electrical poly wire with reflective streamers used in Livingstone adding the Niteguard™ LED system. << Repellence options currently being used << Chilli growing << Chilli grease << Burning chilli bricks << Dogs to warn of intended challenges << Explosive bangers and sound horns << Destruction of specific dangerous animals

Applicable Policy In Zambia, the earliest recorded piece of legislation relating to wildlife conservation impacting on HWC was enacted more than 100 years ago when the Ostrich Export Prohibition, Chapter 115 of the Laws came into force on 16 March 1912 (North- ern Rhodesia Government (NRG), 1948). Later on, the Plumage Birds Protection, Chapter 117 of the Laws came into force on 27 November 1915. In 1941, Ordinance number 41 was enacted but the Game Ordinance Chapter 106 of the Laws later replaced this on 1 January 1943 (NRG, 1948). Afterwards, there was a series of repeals, revisions and replacements of laws. The Fauna Conservation Ordinance Number 43 of 1954 which was replaced by the National Parks and Wildlife Act Number 57 of Figure 7: Map showing the extent of KAZA in Zimbabwe 1968 was amended in 1971 into National Parks and Wildlife Act Chapter 316 (Chomba, Mwenya and Nyirenda, 2011).

Since the mid 1990s, Zambia undertook an extensive review and revision of environmental policy and legislation, which led Causes of Conflict in Zimbabwe to the development of new laws. The new legislation updated laws in terms of new thinking in conservation and in particular << Poor implementation of land-use plans which includes occupation of corridors, scattered lands, living in and adjacent to PA approaches to community involvement in conservation, which ultimately impacts the interaction of humans and wildlife. boundaries << Herding livestock within or too close to PA boundaries << Commuting between villages at night << Poor understanding of animal behaviour by some local residents << Poor understanding how they approach or avoid human settlement, crops and livestock, both during the day and at night. << Feeding of animals in areas where there are many tourists << Change in management in Botswana (Closing of elephant hunting) << During the pre-ban days, hunted animals were watered on the Botswana side by pumps and bore-holes maintaining by those who had the hunting concessions but the stopping of hunting resulted in large number of animals moving into Zimbabwe to seek water in the dry season.

Types and Nature of Human Wildlife Conflicts << Crop damage << Livestock killing and maiming << Damage to property both rural and urban << Direct and perceived attacks on persons << All standing crops including vegetable gardens damage occurring from direct feeding and trampling ranging from slight to total destruction

A12 A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. A13 KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures

Spatial and Temporal Patterns of Human Wildlife Conflicts and Conflict Hotspots Appendix 2 Community questionnaires have indicated a sharp gradient away from the edge of PAs and interconnecting corridors of HWC damage, crops nearest the PAs being the most challenged and effectively protecting others further away. Recommended Species-Specific hwc Mitigation Measures Past Conflict Mitigation Measures The farmers and livestock herders in Zimbabwe are very used to high densities of wildlife due to multiple generations of 1. Elephant (Loxodonta africana) concerted wildlife conservation. It could be argued that rural people here have developed the most advanced and diversified of the countries using ‘traditional’ methods. In the 1990s however, Zimbabwe was at the forefront of PAC thinking with the use of community-owned small-scale electric fencing and commercial wet season PAC hunts for foreign clients. However, in general most problem animals were removed when they came into conflict with people, and then were killed directly or through snaring. Predominantly lethal control used included: << Toxicants << Steel leg hold traps << Direct hunting or lethal removal.

Current Mitigation Measures The mitigation methods being employed in Zimbabwe have been greatly affected by the economic and social upheavals in the country. These have negatively impacted progress made to devolve control of wildlife back to communities where animals reside under the CAMPFIRE program. Currently much of the land-use planning and the implementation of by-laws have been ignored and many plots have been cleared in former wildlife areas. Mitigation across most of the country has been left to the farmers themselves, much to the detriment of the wildlife. << Exclusion fences << Fences traditional and commercial << Electric offsets/hotwire << Repellence options << Passive As mentioned in the introduction it is essential to address HWC in a holistic way. Short-term solutions are urgently needed << Active when the conflict is intense, but difficult long-term strategies also need to be implemented. This section focuses mainly on << Lion minding short to medium term solutions but longer approaches need to be implemented and supported by Government and the private << Limited lethal control sector. << Baboon toxicant control << PAC hunting Addressing conflict with elephants is a particular challenge. First, it is important to plan and implement as many of the << Destruction of specific dangerous animals suggestions outlined as possible. The intelligence of elephants requires that a constant rotation of methods will always work better than reliance on a single method. Applicable Policy The domestication of multilateral agreements and regional protocols which have a bearing on HWC in Zimbabwe is mediated 1.1 Applicable Elephant Behavioural Traits elephants spread out to take advantage of scattered food by national legislative and policy instruments including the: << Elephants are wary of any change that must be exploited while foraging, moving away from paths. Later as it << Parks and Wildlife Act (Chapter 20:14); << Extremely sensitive to chilli pepper becomes warmer they tend to clump and rest before << Draft Wildlife-Based Land Reform Policy of 2004 << Effective on newcomers but once strongly habituated are moving to a new site or to water, following defined paths << Tourism Act (Chapter 14:20); difficult to deter requiring persistence and determination that link a myriad of connecting conduits, mini- << Draft National Tourism Policy 2011-2015; to break the habit corridors that the elephant choose to use rather than << Communal Land Forest Produce Act of 1987; << Threats by elephant mainly adjacent to PAs and corridors ‘cutting through the bush’ forming a new one. Several << Environmental Management Act (Chapter 20:27); that declines sharply the further away crops are grown, elephants may use the same paths though heading to << Rural District Councils Act (Chapter 29:13); frontline crops literally protecting the others further back different destinations travelling along these linked ‘mini << Regional Town and Country Planning Act (Chapter 29:12); << Cow herds largely not risk takers preferring to keep out of corridors’. Any new path occurs only when connecting << Traditional Leaders Act (Chapter 29:17); and cropped lands unless the lands are poorly placed within a a new point of provision or to avoid a blocked pathway << Indigenization and Economic Empowerment Act (Chapter 14:33) corridor or possibly where there is persistent conflict. These << Bulls on the other hand are efficient risk takers going to mini-corridors coalesce into larger pathways following great lengths to obtain a tasty morsel drainage lines up and over higher ground to access other Institutional, Policy and Legislative Framework for the Management of HWC << Which they will intimidate and threaten for, even move in drainage lines beyond such as the Nata system crossing The Parks and Wildlife Authority that manages wildlife on behalf of the government has a policy on tackling problem wildlife. temporally where they can be extremely cunning over at Boli to the Dete/Gwayi drainage system in The most common method used to control problem animals is lethal killing and disturbance shooting. According to the << They mostly commute along paths to and from the lands Hwange National Park. When sandwiched through more government policy, a professional hunter may be engaged to hunt the problem wildlife species deemed by the area manager where they may be ambushed with chilli pepper developed areas or changing land use patterns, they after complaints by villagers. However, the bureaucratic process of getting to the level of killing a problem animal is long, as << Tools need to be rotated so as to not allow habituation to become major highways with a lot of movement observed it involves first assessment by the wildlife authority and making a decision on whether problem warrants killing the animal. A occur seemingly going both somewhere and nowhere, linking hunter is then allowed to look for the animal. However, because of the length of time taken during the process of short distance destinations. Bulls hold the key to the wider decision-making, the wrong animal may end up being killed. The meat is shared between the hunter and the villagers but in knowledge of the greater movement options, being forced the case of an elephant, the tusks are kept by the hunter after paying a substantial amount of money through the Rural District 1.2 Planning and Strategy from their natal herds at puberty, joining and separating Councils. << Elephant corridors and paths other bulls as they mature. Bulls will also suddenly un- << An understanding of how, why and when elephants dertake long distance sojourns often over several months use paths and corridors is essential in the application of through-out the KAZA TFCA (Von Gerhardt, et. al. 2013). mitigating measures. At night and early each morning

A14 A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. A15 KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures

1.3 Possible Application 1.5 Other Tools Studies in many domestic species and a few wild species (e.g. 1.9 Manipulating Male Reproduction Importantly, elephants and other animals choose to move << All the traditional tools deer, bison) have shown that 2-3 doses of the vaccine are and Aggression along established paths that connect them to the resources << An alert fence and passive chilli applications effective in achieving contraception for 1-2 years with no Immunization against GnRH in male domestic animals causes they require. It follows that any interference with these paths << All the chilli options, both passive and active, used in adverse side-effects (Fayrer-Hosken 2008). Studies are two reversible effects in the testes: reduction in testosterone would be treated with suspicion and avoided- even conjunction to provide both discipline and reminder the currently underway in South Africa and Sri Lanka to test the production from the Leydig cells (resulting in reduced libido); circumnavigated. In a strategy to challenge elephants, a include the ACE and Mhiripiribomba options efficacy of this procedure in elephants. and disruption of spermatogenesis in the seminiferous tubules system that is constantly rearranged to take advantage of the (resulting in infertility). African bull elephants vaccinated with natural wariness of elephant and the need to access the paths 1.6 Translocation Another approach is treatment with long acting preparations three doses had lower faecal epiandrosterone concentrations, could prove to be a useful first line tool to prevent problem Translocation is an option using sophisticated equipment both of oestradiol 17-β, which causes negative feedback on the indicating a reduction in testosterone production from the elephant approaching cultivated areas. entire herds and individuals. However, important questions hypothalamus and pituitary, resulting in inhibition of testes, and showed a marked reduction in aggression for periods are where to move them and justifying sufficient funding. In ovulation. Trials in African elephants using sub-coetaneous of 6-9 months (Stout et al. 2007). After further re-vaccination What Exactly what Constitutes a Corridor? southern Africa generally there are too many elephant placing implants which are commercially available for livestock have of bulls that were in musth, a cessation of aggressive behaviour Examining how elephants move over long distances pressure rather on repellence effort. Much has been written shown that pregnancies can be prevented for over 12 months within 7-10 days of the first booster vaccination was noted. considering mounting research data that consistently on this technique popular in other parts of Africa24 , but it is (Hildebrandt et al. 2006). reinforces the establishment of smaller defined home ranges not seen as a viable option in the KAZA TFCA at this time. within protected areas and in-between rather than large movement patterns connecting protected areas, masking the 2. Hippo (Hippopotamus amphibius) true significance of the well-developed paths observed and 1.7 Biological Technologies used by elephants (Songhurst 2010, Chase 2013). There is Biological methods that hold promise for mitigating HEC controversy (e.g. van Ardde 2006) around corridors and how include physiological, pharmacological and immunological they are defined that many regrettably take to mean bulk methods for modifying the reproduction and/or behaviour of movement of elephant in and out of protected areas whereas elephants. These could have applications in situations where home range studies clearly refute this, although that said, bulls elephant populations need to be reduced or maintained do on occasion move considerable distances. This under- without further increase, or for controlling aggressive standing, seriously challenging the concept of source and behaviour and musth in adult males. sink dynamics popularised as the answer for dealing with the large elephant populations found in the KAZA region (Bennett 1.8 Contraception 2003). Contraception as a means of slowing elephant population growth has been developed in South Africa and two General Approach Toward Mitigation of Conflict with experimental immuno-contraception trials on small, enclosed, Elephants populations were conducted and some experiments to Without question, planning land-use in areas where elephants investigate the possibility of sterilizing males (Fayrer-Hosken and people coexist is critical. Without cooperation between 2008) were also carried out. The results to date of stakeholders most mitigation methods will not work. Below immuno-contraception trials indicate that it is feasible, at are listed a number of ideas to consider when planning a least for small populations, and few side effects on elephant ‘mitigation intervention’. welfare and behaviour have been detected. << Agricultural Lands need to be planted in defendable clusters Its main application is likely to be in containing population << The first line defence from corridor or PA’s (see note growth in the many small, largely unviable populations in The hippo is one of the most feared of all African animals do << As the pools evaporate, territories become smaller above listing HWC approaches) South Africa. Its potential use in Kruger National Park and to their aggressive behaviour around bodies of water. Most resulting fights between dominant males often leading << Establish a physical boundary Addo Elephant National Park is still being debated. The conflict occurs within a few hundred metres of a body of to eviction of the loser with nowhere to go. The ousted << Consider a ‘motorised’ or chase-to-boundary by a method is expensive and is not seen as a useful approach by water and is usually when a person is collecting water or males often take refuge nearby, often under a shady bush, response team to enforce boundaries stakeholders elsewhere in the region; many of those tending a garden. where they can be extremely dangerous if approached << Cluster defence consulted considered it “unnatural”, if not morally wrong, to << Mostly hippo rest on the bottom lying or crouched head << Individual land defence spend vast sums containing the productive growth of 2.1 Applicable Hippo Behavioural Traits either permanently out or dipping their heads under elephants that could be harvested to alleviate poverty. << Live in large bodies of water both flowing and stagnant resurfacing every 5-10 minutes when disturbed < 1.4 Keep Them Out << Largely nocturnal resting during the day feeding at night < If very disturbed hippos seek water with overhanging Induction of temporary infertility (i.e. reversible << Will readily exit water and graze during the day when vegetation- they often stay underwater only exposing their << Electric fencing where possible (see AfESG 2000) nostrils to breathe at 5-7 minute intervals << Traditional fence with electric wire off-set contraception) in cycling females can be achieved by hungry or when unmolested immuno-contraception, involving immunization against << Must have clear access to grazing areas and to where they << Hippo are not strong swimmers, and in deep water will << Fence fitted with noise makers such as cow bells rather walk/run along set routes rather than to swim << Plastic bottle with inverted chip packets insert acts as a cellular components or hormones that are essential for establish and maintain a routine, usually clearly demarcated reproduction. Trials in Africa have shown that three doses by midden splash and paths surfacing briefly to breathe and look around visual barrier << Tethered in deep water which occasionally occurs during << Effective crop guarding administered at intervals of three weeks using drop-out darts << Strongly territorial living in family pods largely at peace prevented pregnancies in elephant cows for up to one year with communities unless disturbed capture they are easily held << Manned watch towers for farmers to guard fields at night << Where the pod rests fish congregate to feed off the dung (see photographs) (Delsink et al. 2003). << Hippo move along distinct paths to and from their pools often on separate entry and exit paths. They exit the and often river fisherman on their Mokoros venture too water up a shallow incline where they expose themselves close and are attacked gradually compared to entry back into water with steeper << The physiology of hippo being an aquatic species, is more sides enabling them to crash back in if disturbed similar to whales and dolphins rather than animals so << Hippo are able to move considerable distance, several that surface blood vessels are deeper seated and more 24 Guidelines for the in situ translocation of the African elephant for conservation purposes http://www.iucn.org/about/work/programmes/ kilometres, from the water at night returning before dawn constricted consequently drug absorption is considerably species/who_we_are/ssc_specialist_groups_and_red_list_authorities_directory/mammals/african_elephant/tools_studies/translocation_guide- lines/?uPubsID=2869

A16 A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. A17 KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures

slower that needs to be borne in mind when considering 2.3 Keep Them Out – Some Sort of << The troop may have several other temporary roosts nearer knowing and conversing with neighbouring troops, darting Barrier is Essential the crop, which they will use for convenience, depending constantly reminding one another, it would seem, of their < < Hippo are very sensitive to the opioid group of drugs << Electric fence, if applicable on where their preferred food source is at any one time. respective home range boundaries. It would appear that < rendering chemical capture difficult in the past. Recently << Traditional fence with electric off set < Roosts are recognised by the pungent smell emanating while boundaries remain intact in relation to one another a combination of drugs has been found BAM mixture << Traditional fence from them, as well as the ground beneath being devoid of the exact position changes frequently up to ½ a (Butorphenol, Azaperone and Medetomidine) that << Defensive barrier fitted with a taut steel cable some vegetation (depending on the level of occupation). Small kilometre depending on subtle troop strength and immobilizes hippo without losing its ability to surface to 500mm above ground passing through large solid poles at trees in the vicinity, used as play gyms by the younger dominance changes between the respective troops breathe regularly so do not drown. This in combination 7metre intervals that they are unable to step over animals, are often bent over and clear of leaves lower probably influenced by seasonal food variations and with additional ketamine and some mechanical << Offset early warning fence (4-5 metres from barrier string down. perceived human threat as seasonal operations vary to < innovations to existing capture equipment allows for set 2,2 m up) < Interestingly there is increasing observations that indicate grow crops for example. The study in question suggests the selective capture and translocation of them to safer << Fence can be fitted with cow bells an association with bush pig that forage beneath the roost strongly that on Thetford Estates that there was a clear refuges << Plastic bottle with inverted chip packets insert acts as a feeding on baboon faeces particularly when enriched difference between ‘during the week’ and ‘weekend’ < < Hippo are unable to cross a vertical sided gully too wide visual deterrent during crop raiding forays activities where during the week the baboon tended to < to step across nor are they able to step over solid obstacles << Effective on the spot crop guarding < Baboons have a well-developed and disciplined social less frequent areas used by people probably because of < < They also dislike strong light << Manned watch tower recommended structure governing their behavior. During foraging the active harassed from the lands during cropping (Le-Bel & << They have sensitive skins dominant males remain fairly well hidden relying on the La Grange 2012). << Given the opportunity they will brazenly enter built up sub-adults to detect danger however when commuting it << Research trials manipulating male dominance by removing areas to graze 2.4 Tools is the dominant troop males that determine direction and the alpha male from one troops reflected an immediate << All the traditional tools discussed earlier lead the troop though not often from the front, more by change to the home range boundary of the other each << Barriers of any sort help to frustrate hippos audial grunts time giving ground to the adjacent troop home range, but 2.2 Planning and Strategy << Alert fence and passive chilli applications < << They move in predictable patterns along established importantly the relative position of all the troops remained < Provide and maintain passageways << All the chilli options both passive and active used in < paths or roads while foraging but also establishing their intact throughout the program removing other males < Lands planned in clusters that are properly fenced conjunction to provide both discipline and reminder the << Any development should be a minimum of 100 metres own paths particularly in broken country along the side << When not persecuted, baboons appear to live in distinct include the chilli dispenser options of steep slopes mostly inaccessible to other animals that seldom overlapping home ranges in which they forage, away from the river or dam waterline << Torches and bear-bangers << Cluster defence - A strong solid barrier/fence or trench is become more conspicuous the closer these paths occur to occasionally frequenting the common boundary between essential their night roosts. Baboons have well developed eyesight, them where they vocally announce their respective posi- << Apply individual crop/land minding in severely 2.5 Translocation Options which they primarily rely upon to detect danger. tions to enforce their boundaries. Mostly these disputes compromised fields Now a definite option using the BAM drug combinations and << Their eyesight, apparently the most developed amongst are settled by vocal exchanges at the boundary interface << If these conditions cannot be met, seriously consider sophisticated equipment enabling the capture and translo- the mammal’s species, is particularly attuned to move- seldom resulting in physical contact but it does seem they translocation them elsewhere as the technology to achieve cation of a number of individual animals. Currently there is ment, which they are able to detect quickly even at long need to view one another. this has been established a market for a number of particularly sub-adult and younger ranges. It is practically impossible to approach a troop un- << Where they are attracted outside their home ranges to adults into the commercial sector. noticed, for the simple fact that if you can see them they ‘bait stations’ for control purposes, their behaviour can definitely spot you well before approaching too close. changes dramatically often resorting to physical fighting 3. Baboon (Papio cynocephalus ursinus) << Where they detect even minute changes to routine and until common agreement in troop ranking is achieved obstacles they are not familiar with, they will first avoid when they then try to stay clear of one another, the it, an observation that must be exploited to provide good dominant troops given preference so that they satellite repellence. It appears that major changes in land use for around round one another as the weaker troop make way example are at first avoided for a season but then through for the stronger in a ‘battle of words’ while the attraction chance encounter or a mechanism of passed on of the provisioned food dominates proceedings. experience, never deduction, the food potential is realised Observations indicate that while several troops may be where they thereafter connive to obtain it having now attracted to the pre-bait site, particularly when become habituated. The mechanism involved has yet to established for some time, not all would be feeding at be fully understood but seems to be a process of an the same time. It would appear that the troops rather ‘information transfer’ in some way, where this remain close by waiting to feed in turn possibly in some information is passed onto the troop probably through sort of ‘peck’ order arrangement as discussed determined immigrant dispersal male acceptance that is then added to by troop strength all the while still bickering and fighting. their knowledge base and subsequent behaviour Observations also indicate that the dominance ranking thereafter. achieved is not dependent on numbers but the strength of << All the sensory organs play a role in this, but Baboon the male coalition involved that we successfully managed principally rely more on sight than smell or hearing. by removing all the dominant males to achieve consistent Baboons are observant and quickly recognize weak points feeding at each bait station in the various preventative measures placed against them. << During this time of frenzied activity, tensions remain high Baboon however quickly learn to avoid each of them and resulting in much anxiety by the respective troops waiting rather enter elsewhere where there are less changes. often resulting is some displacement behaviour ranging Current repellence options in the form of scarecrows from leaf stripping to serious bark stripping that also 3.1 Applicable Baboon Behavioural Traits to Provide Effective Mitigation or carbide guns, are seldom effective in the long term occurs in the wild, depending on the time period anxiety << Baboon cause great devastation to cereal crops that include maize, pine plantations, sugar cane and sometimes wheat because they are static and routine in practice. Even the continuous. This is particularly noticeable amongst the which they chew like sugar cane spitting out the pith. routine movement of a crop guard is quickly summed up, troops waiting longer periods to feed fuelled by boredom << They sleep in a well-defined roost usually in tall trees in a wooded gully or at the base of a hill or in thick dense riverine which they will then work around. it would appear. Where this condition is temporary this vegetation. These roosts can often be recognised from the air as clearly defined paths may be seen emerging from them in a << Recent satellite telemetry on Thetford Estates near Harare behaviour ceases as soon as the situation returns back to pattern similar to the spokes of a bicycle wheel. has indicated that while daily foraging and grooming takes normality but over time, it is suspected that the disorder up most of their daily routine, time is also spent becomes chronic becoming a longer term learned

A18 A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. A19 KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures

adaptive behavioural trait that is then passed on! This ideas exchanged and are adopted? Shirley Sturm in her 3.2 Recommendations for Totally << Use of guard dogs condition frequently occurs on large intensively managed book Almost Human (Strurm 1987) relates to an incident Habituated Baboon: << Community rally to provide organised drives to chase exotic plantations that become extremely difficult to of a dispersal male that had learned the art of killing << Remove all the infected baboon by lethal control them out from the area to the PA’s < control. Thomson Gazelle fawns that only after final acceptance to << Discourage new incursions around towns, villages or < Green laser therapy: Recently discovered is the effective < < In afforested plantations it is suspected that mal-adaption the troop did the others adopt the idea and successfully homes eviction of baboon from their night roosts (see strategies to the constantly changing environment, brought on by harvested 100 fawns the next year. The inference being << Diligently remove and incinerate all rubbish and tools used for details) and to a lesser degree from constant ‘rapid’ silvicultural operations may be the driver that animals do not readily adopt new ideas even << Encourage community buy in to enforce local bi-laws and places where they have become a nuisance provided that of the problem, constantly changing landscape suspending habituation to new opportunity. Procedures developed for ensure clean living they are not too habituated the baboons’ ability to geo locate necessary in the the control of baboons over many years, habituating them << Capture, paint and release of dominant males through maintenance of home ranges. to a new site is an art that takes time, but once developed cage traps << Effectively these plantations follow repetitive cycles of it becomes a habit difficult to break 3.3 Keep Them Out – Preventing << For extreme cases the removal of entire troops using large thickening up, followed by thinning out by continuous << Increasing urban baboon challenges underscores the Habituation at all Costs: camp traps pruning back clearing all substrate vegetation beneath to problem habituation brings: Baboons unlike most species << Dedicated guarding diligently watching over crops at all promote growth but inadvertently completely changing adapt well to human provisioning quickly adopting times the nature of the landscape. All the trees rapidly growing information gleaned, changing their behaviour habits to 3.4 Tools: << Traditional methods that include: << Traditional tools in height, changing both the profile of individual trees accommodate the new challenge. Reports of child << Banging tins and the landscape as a whole effectively rendering the kidnapping and aggression toward humans is on the << Watch towers << Poly tapes and streamers << Community participation baboons lost, unable to define respective home range increase in urban areas that seldom occurs in natural << Catapults boundaries leading to frustration, most often at these populations, unnatural behaviour not ever seen in the << ACE ambushchillixploders << Community rallying to help one another << Cage traps interfaces, as the individual troops ‘argue’ to establish wild. In the larger urban centres in the partner countries, << Stock whips recognizable boundaries. While plantations don’t occur baboons are not a problem and troops on the edge of << Large camp traps << Various homemade ‘pipe’ bangers << Green laser in the immediate KAZA TFCA it does so in the Zimbabwe town don’t try to enter as they seemingly seem to be un- << Improved bangers (firing live rounds over the top, carbide Eastern Highlands underscoring a principle that ultimately aware of potential food within. This proves the hypothesis bangers and crackers) the successful control of baboon in conflict with that where they don’t know, they don’t go, achieved in << Scarecrows - incorporating moving positions and hiding agriculture, in particular plantations, for the long term the past (personal observation) by rigorous lethal control tactics to mimic real life situations must include re planning of the respective enterprises to that successfully removed all the baboon including << Manned watch tower recommended to deal with chronic reduce this driver for anxiety in combination with other dispersal males that knew of it, effectively removing all incursions exclusion and repellence options Baldwin & La Grange, information of its existence in the baboon knowledge 2013) bank. For the smaller more recent settlements particularly 4. Bush Pig (Potamochoerus porcus) << There is evidence to suggest that Leopard do play a large border towns that developed much later, this did not role in maintaining baboon numbers, although it has occur baboon allowed even encouraged to live and roam been shown through a study in Matopos National Park in town crossing over human wildlife fear barrier complicated Zimbabwe, that baboons may not necessarily form their by indiscriminate public rubbish waste dispersal and principle diet. opinion change not to undertake lethal control. << Baboons are not considered dangerous, however, where Consequently, baboon have thrived on these newly found little resistance is put up whilst crop raiding, they have provisions and have learned to successfully intimidate learned to intimidate particularly women working in lands humans rendering disease transfer between baboons and in the communal areas in order to raid the crop. humans more probable as both populations increase and Occasionally baboons can be a problem predating on strive for the same commodities in the future. Habituated livestock, particularly lambs. They are also able to inflict baboon, in fact any animal, is extremely difficult if serious damage to inexperienced dogs, upon which they impossible to control eventually resorting to lethal control will quickly turn once they feel secure, that for baboon would mean the total removal of all << In the Gokwe communal land adjacent to Sengwa troops in town and surrounding area until the knowledge Research Station FAO reported that between 1993 and is broken. Trials have indicated that provided detection of 1996, 241 livestock were taken of which the principle improvised food is prevented, they never establish the predators were 52% by baboon, 34% by lion and 12% enterprise as a food source no matter how attractive it by leopard. To have such a high percentage attributed to may look enforcing the cliché’ that where they don’t baboon is extremely unusual, undoubtedly not replicated know they don’t go! This may be accomplished in two elsewhere, but it does reflect baboon ability to discover ways, by preventing other troop males or bachelor males new opportunities and adapt to them. Observing them from venturing too close and preventing all access to while bark stripping in the Eastern Highlands of improvised food sources in particular waste products 4.1 Applicable Behavioural Traits < Zimbabwe (Baldwin & La Grange 2013) indicates that < Experience on two occasions, one involving a commercial << Bushpig are nocturnal omnivores that move in sounders comprising of 7-9 pigs up to 15 where they are not persecuted, baboon hierarchy within each troop, limits individuals farm near Harare and the other under rural chieftainship evidence of their passage more noted by ground sign (spoor and rooting up) than being seen doing something different or exploiting something new near Victoria Falls has conclusively shown that prompt << Being omnivores bushpig eat anything from offal to grain and are particularly partial to fermented maize which they detect disciplining junior members that try to do so providing action following lethal control to physically chase away from afar and home in on the reason why tree stripping for example is carried out new incursions was successful to prevent baboons << They lie up in the densest undergrowth or reeds around during the day only vacating at the last moment when approached by some troops but not others even immediately adjacent re-establishing themselves in the area again. from which they charge out to seek new refuge to one another, they simply do not copy others that have << Although well equipped to defend themselves they would rather attempt to run off rather than attack unless cornered different movement and strategy patterns. How then are << Bushpig occur throughout sub region, but are more numerous in the Highveld, probably because of the better rainfall found there.

A20 A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. A21 KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures

<< Observations indicate that they are more numerous in traps are pulled out it leaves a thin coating to both 4.2 Repellence Technology << Open out approach areas to crops wetter areas and broken country favouring marshy ground lubricate and camouflage any scent remaining. This << During the rains bushpig crop raiding is more effectively << Exploit bushpig extraordinary sense of smell to repel them to root and dig in. They particularly thrive in commercial problem is also overcome by habituating them to the trap controlled by physically preventing their access to the << Actively exploit the dry season to reduce numbers areas where there is wasted water flooding large areas beforehand where they learn to accept the food along crops using preventative fencing (see my suggestions for such as found below large irrigation schemes such as with human scent before capture is contemplated improved traditional fencing) and by using scent repellents Hippo Valley Estates << Where bushpig become a problem to standing crops, to advantage to 4.4 Keep Them Out – Proper Management < << As a result of this evidence suggests that predators are hunting is still the most effective method employed, capitalise on their natural suspicious nature that has < Open up boundaries < not the main controlling factor to limit their numbers, but success being dependent upon the hunter’s skill to proved effective < Regular scout patrols to determine movement and lie up rather the amount of ground water affecting soil moisture approach the feeding animal in the crop under full << The use of toxicants is not considered appropriate or places < conditions during the dry season. It has been found that darkness downwind without a torch and alerting the pigs. effective as bushpig seem to succumb considerable < Low close wire fencing ≤ 500mm height with strong poles bushpig root in the ground for food even if the food is Success of this approach is improved by opening distances from the bait site although there are systems to 7metres apart across vulnerable approaches < placed on the surface. Once food becomes scarce with walkways through the lands at regular intervals to access apply the toxicant that is considered target specific. This < Set up and constantly change smell deterrents < the onset of the dry season, they are unable to root over the crop without making a noise. By opening up the is achieved by burying the bait in a shallow trench with a < Regular night patrols in the cropped lands wide ranging areas, rather becoming confined to vlei approach area bordering the crops forces the pigs to lead in of uncontaminated bait which they root out and heads and along riverine vegetation, where the soil is expose themselves which they dislike but will undertake ingest. 4.5 Tools moist enough to continue rooting providing significant to crop raid improving the opportunity to hunt them as << Diligence opportunity to trap them. On Hippo Valley Estates (HVE) they cross by using sophisticated night goggles and laser 4.3 Understand the Conditions Under << Bush pig camp trap (La Grange, 2016) problems of drainage and the growth of sugarcane has sights. << Good crop minding practices provided ideally, improved habitat for bushpig resulting << Alternatively, bushpig may be hunted during the day Which Bushpig Thrive in a significant increase in bushpig numbers. It is probable where they roost in nearby thickets by ambushing them << Reduce conditions for population increase in particular that naturally, they would come under nutritional stress as they run from beaters beating through in an extended waste wet area management during the dry months and experience difficulty in line through the thicket employing 12-gauge shotguns or obtaining food at this time, the principle factor that limits machetes as they attempt to escape. Success obviously their numbers in the dry lowveld area of Zimbabwe. being dependent upon choosing where the pigs will run 5 Antelope– or a Variety of Species of Plains Game. << As discussed for baboon, bushpig appear to thrive on out, quick accurate shooting and a lot of luck! Bushpig baboon excrement located beneath baboon roosting in the absence of suitable thickets harvest grass and set places and from nearby villages defecating in the up a dome of piled grass in which they both nest and surrounding bush nurture piglets from which they sleep in during the day << Bushpig have a well-developed sense of smell and hearing from which they ‘explode’ out from if disturbed providing which they exercise at all times. While depredating an element of surprise to avoid predators including man agricultural crops individuals of a sounder communicate hunting them requiring foreknowledge and a steady with one another by uttering low, but audible grunts. composure to exploit the occasion! When danger threatens one grunt will send the entire << This would be an effective community action approach sounder scuttling for safety. combined with using dogs << Bush pig are acutely aware of any changes to the << Regrettably macro farming operations in general and in environment, particularly smell, and will avoid these particularly large irrigation enterprises provide ideal changes even to the point of denying themselves food. habitat for bushpig the whole year round so that Experiments attempting to attract them to bait through natural control is minimised, there being excessive run a set gun have failed because of this! They approached off providing ideal habitat in which they move, roost and the trap but refused to enter, probably because of human forage providing more wet/damp soil to root in that boosts scent remaining. With respect to bait stations, this reproduction success significantly. problem is alleviated as the smell of humans already has << Reducing bushpig populations under these circumstances been accepted along with the bait right from the onset. is more effective during the dry season of the year when << Where they crop raid, this well-developed cautionary natural food is scarce where they take more readily to behaviour can be used to advantage by continually fermented maize offered overcoming their natural placing ‘smell’ obstacles in their path, particularly plastic suspicion of humans rendering them more vulnerable fencing, cotton soaked in creosote and placed in tins, << Bushpig even under these circumstance are still cunning 5.1 Applicable Behavioural Traits in while minimising the hard interface between or strong perfume odours that effectively prevents them requiring foresight and planning to design and carry out a << Occasionally, antelope such as Kudu, damage crops, for communities and protected areas. accessing the crop. well thought through strategy. example cotton or tobacco, but losses usually do not << The development of the wildlife industry has enabled the << Bush pig dislike using established paths or roads, << Habituation to exploit this opportunity is critical but once warrant lethal control measures, and they are better capture of entire herds of animals including hippo and preferring to make their own. They avoid open areas and feeding regularly they can be removed using a portable deterred by fencing or captured and translocated, rather elephant prefer to move through the denser bush to which they are pig boma/camp trap or sounder eliminator system. Recent than to destroy. << Wildlife that includes antelope, provides for huge valuable ideally adapted. Their body shape slopes naturally forward trialling of this technique in sugar cane in Hippo Valley << Some species, for example Sable inflict little damage to income generating opportunities, possibly much more forcing the vegetation over them as they pass beneath. Estates has indicated that there is an optimum area the crops and do very well on the edges of lands where there than any other community project because of the << Their suspicious nocturnal nature makes them difficult to camp trap should be. The estimation is at ± 5metres is less competition by other species. multiplicity of value adding possibilities that may be control, but methods have been devised to overcome this. diameter, set upon currently used bushpig paths << The wildlife industry in Southern Africa provides lucrative exploited Mechanical trap systems are largely ineffective as they preferably near but not on a road where they are also business options, so where a problem persists the offender << In years of severe drought, particularly in the Lowveld easily detect odours associated with humans. Old school accustomed to human traffic. The camp trap should be can be captured and translocated, or set up as a safari regions of Zimbabwe, wildlife resorted to large scale trappers eliminate these by boiling the trap in hot water well camouflaged in the standing cane and once baited hunt from which a return may be derived to the irrigated crops that saved them providing an upside to with a small concentration of caustic soda, rinsing them left alone for the pigs to discover and over a couple of communities. macro agriculture. Mass die off was prevented by well and then dunking them back in more hot water upon days, enter. << When large numbers of antelope are involved, providing outside fodder for them in the bush and through which a layer of melted bees wax floats so that as the consideration should be given to the creation of a mass capture placing them into protected fences enabling community wildlife area buffer zone and these animals the temporary feeding of them, providing fodder from moved and managed through providing community buy other areas further afield, less affected by the drought. A22 A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. A23 KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures

<< Antelope are sensitive to people activities so range while heavier cartridges of .338 Win to 375 H&H << Crocodiles are able to remain beneath the water for up to << Good livestock minding – herding cattle and goats preventive techniques work well and should be explored, be used for eland. Most farmers are conversant with one and a half hours, and in small water bodies, usually maintaining a watchful eye over them particularly when only considering translocation or lethal options when this hunting plains game, but the novice is advised to study detect human presence well before they themselves are grazing close to water and kraaling them at night. is not possible. the booklet “Ballistics in Perspective” (LA Grange 1990). seen, submerging and remaining in ambush. << Where animals are to be directly hunted to protect << Considering translocation options refered to the relevant << Small pools, particularly along large rivers, are deceptive crops, the shooting should be carried out by a competent sections on capture from books in the reference list. and often harbour large crocodiles. They should be 6.3 Keep Them Out – Some Sort of person with a rifle calibre in the range of a .223 to 30-06 << Capture is an expensive operation so rural areas dealing approached with caution. Barrier is Essential Springfield, using low power, good quality rifle scopes with smaller numbers of problem antelope are << Although crocodiles are opportunists, taking whatever << Diamond mesh crocodile protection fence particularly if shot at night. Larger weapons in the range encouraged to consider the authors patented ‘Drop Boma food is available; their preferred food is ground feeding << Dedicated watch person diligently watching over activities .338 Winchester Magnum to .375H&H would be better System’ managed by AWMC in Harare. fish for example barbel. In well-stocked dams and rivers within the protected area for Eland and Giraffe. Care should be taken to ensure therefore they are less likely to be a threat to livestock << Protected area should be in shallow water exposed, totally that correct weapons are used in terms of the respective << Confirmed man-eaters, however, will continue to take free of vegetation rocks or debris build up countries Law. 5.2 Planning and Strategy humans even when relocated to dams better stocked with << In the South-Eastern Lowveld, Impala were deterred << Repellence techniques work well for antelope fish. The removal of these individuals should be effectively from entering sugar cane during the drought of << Consider moving problem species to a collective wildlife considered immediately 6.4 Tools 1983 by hunting them at night along the edge where they use area << Crocodiles have a well-developed sense of hearing, smell << Crocodile fences and the proper management of them. usually entered to enforce a memory dynamic. << Exploit value added opportunities it provides and sight, and may be attracted by barking dogs or the << Kraals << Kudu and eland can extensively damage tobacco and << Good crop minding bleating of a goat, and lured into a trap or a ‘shootable’ cotton where this habit has been allowed to develop position 6.5 Trapping and Translocation << Hunting opportunities particularly for local residents are 5.3 Keep Them Out << Responding to their keenly developed senses of smell and There are several methods by which crocodiles are caught rapidly disappearing providing a lucrative opportunity for << Fencing is the best option sight, meat placed in a trap upwind is easily detected as and managed. These include: community wildlife programs such as campfire that may they patrol the water’s edge at night. << The spring steel rope noose trap for individual large be exploited << Females seldom exceed 3,5m while the males can grow crocodiles << Weapons in the range of .270 Win to 30–06 Springfield 5.4 Tools to 4.5, with the largest caught in Zimbabwe being 6m in << Floating partly submerged and on land box traps calibres are suggested for the hunting of the smaller range << Streamers on fences work well length << Physical capture from a boat for smaller individuals of antelope, using well-constructed soft nose bullets, << Try scent options like spraying on rendered down lion/ << Crocodile are easily spotted at night using a torch, << Harpooning larger ones tethered to a marker float with combinations falling within the so called ‘green band’ leopard scats characteristically showing one red eye. For hunting which they are retrieved once they tire out purposes, undisturbed crocodile populations can easily be << Partly submerged cable snare lines to capture them 6. Crocodile (Crocodylus niloticus) approached in this manner using a boat around the upper jaw but all these require to be used << There are many methods of capturing crocodile including under licence granted to an experienced operators cage traps both static and floating, various steel noose requiring to capture them for research or commercial traps, harpoon and the use of partly submerged cable purposes snare lines to capture them << The mass capture of crocodile also possible by << Generally unknown is that crocodile do stress easily during surrounding a large bait carcase (buffalo) in a shallow dug capture and man-handling but are quickly calmed down out water filled depression near a crocodile infested water by binding their mouths closed using tape, blindfolding body. The pond is encircled with nets and approached via them and placing them in a darkened well aerated cool trenches dug in from the main water body each guarded crate or reservoir away from disturbance where they can by a drop gate. Once the crocodile moves in through be transported or held for several days. these into the pond, the gates are manually tripped << Communities in communal areas are able to fence out capturing all the crocodiles within that are systematically portions of the river or dam with diamond mesh providing processed crocodile free river/dam frontage for livestock to drink and << Shock immobilisation in comparison to using of drugs to gather water safely << Traditionally the drug of choice in the past has been << Aptly demonstrated in Namibia are well placed and Plaxadil a paralysing drug that while paralysed the managed crocodile fences that separate the main water crocodile remains awake that is now questioned body from a selected protected area free of crocodile << The more humane method is to shock stun crocodile at the back of the neck immediately behind the head that renders it unconscious to allow jaw taping and blind- 6.2 Planning and Strategy folding. This has the desired calming effect. Generally << Provide a minimum of 100 metres away from the river or unknown is that crocodile do stress easily during dam waterline for houses and farming activities capture and man handling but are quickly calmed down << Discourage passage and gathering of people close to the As with the hippo, the crocodile lurks in the life giving water so important to farmers and herders. Some crocs specialize in by binding their mouths closed using tape, blindfolding waters’ edge eating livestock and even people and management of human behaviour is essential for mitigation methods to be effective. them and placing them in a darkened well aerated cool << Plan water for consumptive purposes away from natural Murphy, C. (2007) in the Caprivi and conflict around Lake Kariba (McGregor 2004). (Thomas 2006) Crocodile/human conflict crate or reservoir away from disturbance where they can water bodies in the Okavango Delta, Botswana. (Bourquin & Shacks 2015) threats to the croc in the Okavango and Angola using attack data be transported or held for several days. Care needs to be << Specific crocodiles known as problem individuals should to look for trends (Pooley 2015). exercised to ensure their snouts remain clear to breathe be destroyed freely The back legs may be tied back loosely together << Crocodile fence off a number of protected spots opposite 6.1 Applicable Crocodile Behavioural Traits over the back (not too tight to reduce blood circulation) dwellings and night kraals, safe positions to access water that effectively restricts them, periodically hosing them << Crocodiles are a threat to livestock along most of the larger rivers in particular those adjacent to the communal areas where << Where possible try to manage fishing along the rivers to down with water in exceptionally dry hot weather the waters are heavily fished try and improve fish harvesting in a sustainable manner conditions << During the summer months when the crocodiles feed and are most active, they regularly take livestock, and occasionally as is being explored along the river in Niassa Reserve in humans Mozambique

A24 A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. A25 KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures

7. Lion (Panthera leo) << In Namibia the Lion Guardian approach is firstly to warn << Away from protected areas neighbouring communities of intended approach and << Dedicated guarding diligently watching over the livestock then to identify kills by monitoring periods of very at all times localised pride movement during peak hunting periods << Implement some sort of flashing LED light system on the outside the park which they react to and remove the kraal walls carcase before the lion benefit, increasing kill effort for << Strive to let the animals out earlier to graze and bring little return them back before sundownc) << In Zimbabwe the Hwange Lion Research Unit similarly warn communities but then to react to these incursions 7.3 Tools and chase and disturb them back to the Park using << Diligence vuvuzelas << Well-built kraals << Modern IT technology has enabled the electronic << Good livestock minding recording of data on line and while it is understood that << LED lights many communities do not have cell towers at present communications for rural communities is expanding fast. There are many options including SMS Frontline, 7.4 Problem Lion Management of KoBoCollect that maybe considered that automatically Habituated Individuals inform responsible persons and register on the main data << Lethal control options bank << PAC hunting << Translocation concerns: there are concerns translocating problem lion to other areas, that each 7.5 Trapping and Translocation situation be thoroughly investigated to prevent mal << Trapping of individual lion using box traps with falling adjustment of the lion in already inhabited situations or Next to the elephant, the lion has caused more conflict incidence than any other animal. Work on these predators has doors the transfer of the undesirable behavioural trait. Research produced a number of innovative studies of conflict between lions, cattle and people in the Kalahari (Hermann, 2002) and in << Darting and chemical capture of entire prides: At night in Namibia has indicated that many of these lion later the Caprivi (Hanssen, et al 2014) and Stander (2000) for example and the conservation of lions and other large carnivores in lions are easily lured into bait amplifying recordings of returned to the site of capture the Kunene region, Namibia (Potgieter, 2014). animals in distress which they quickly react to and investigate if heard. Their bold nature particularly when 7.1 Applicable Lion Behavioural Traits << young males and ousted pride males tend to wander from 7.2 Keep Them Out – Proper Kraaling in not persecuted completely ignores human and equipment << lions are a threat to livestock alongside most of the larger natal home ranges outside and adjacent to protected Well-Constructed Kraals is Essential presence even while the darting operation is underway areas often remaining close by but occasionally collared allowing for the darting of the entire group. There are a PAs that are adjacent to the communal areas particularly << Must not be able to see in or out of night kraals data has indicated long distance movement covering number of drug combinations presently used most where there are no buffer zones << Kraals built providing solid walls < several hundred kilometres of individuals or a small group operators favouring a zolitol medetomidine cocktail. < lion attacks on livestock multiply significantly where << Exposed as much as possible presumably searching for food and reproductive livestock is grazed or watered within the park boundary << Livestock properly herded at all times attracting them directly to the night kraals opportunities elsewhere turning up in some amazing << livestock that are not night kraaled are at particular risk places possibly following an old corridor route << individual animals that lag behind on return to the kraals << Lion like most animals attacking, require to see their prey 8 Hyena (Crocuta crocuta) that end up sleeping outside are extremely vulnerable targeting a specific individual before committing to an << good livestock minding includes staying away from the attack rather than blindly leaping in PA boundaries, daily herding and night kraaling remaining << Research universally has demonstrated that to prevent this consistently vigilant essential first line of defence opportunity, kraal design should primarily prevent them components to prevent lion attacks from seeing in and secondarily prevent access << lion behaviour particularly towards humans changes << Kraals may be built from several materials including living dramatically at night where they become much bolder fences (diamond mesh either side of Commiphora species and take on more risks to obtain prey thickets), woven matting, close set poles and even steel << Regrettably their boldness at night also renders them more panels so long as they are substantial vulnerable to poisoning practices that is of huge concern << Early alert systems that include dogs are strongly advised << Observations over time are that mostly animals kraaled << Attacking lions generally approach from cover downwind are let out too late in the day and brought back in the so the kraal should be exposed in open ground as much evening after dark when lions are most active; mostly as possible to discourage undetected approach a logistic issue of young boys having to attend school. << With this in mind it is important to always respond to Letting them out and bringing them back earlier would be signals indicating lion approach to prevent an attack a better option before it occurs << the practice of not kraaling donkeys for part of the year << Lions are suspicious of flashing LED lights that are properly also needs to be addressed that is attractive to all placed at regular intervals 7-10 metres set at approach carnivores particularly if they are fitted with a bell height << recently it has been established that cow bells fitted to << Both Niteguard and the PREDeter versions are indicate where wandering animals are, strongly attract lion recommended and hyena to them << Burning fires and manned guard positions may also be 8.1 Applicable Hyena Behavioural Traits << moving kraals to provide some form of rotational grazing necessary to deal with chronic situations << Hyena are a threat to livestock alongside most of the larger Protected areas that are adjacent to the communal areas as was practised many years ago implementing the Lagisa << Most of the prides found in the KAZA TFCA have been particularly where there are no buffer zones however because of increased numbers, penetrate more deeply into the grazing scheme in Tsholotsho is the way to go combining collared for research purposes that are geo monitored communal areas conservation agriculture with good livestock minding enabling reaction to chase lion back to the protected << Hyena attacks on livestock multiply significantly where livestock is grazed or watered within the park boundary attracting areas. them directly to the night kraals A26 A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. A27 KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures

<< Livestock that are not night kraaled are at particular risk many communities do not have cell towers at present 8.2 Keep Them Out – Proper Kraaling in Well-Constructed Kraals is Essential << Individual animals that lag behind on return to the kraals communications for rural communities is expanding fast. << Must not be able to see in or out of night kraals that end up sleeping outside are extremely vulnerable There are many options including SMS Frontline, << Kraals built providing solid walls << Good livestock minding includes staying away from the KoBoCollect that maybe considered that automatically << Exposed as much as possible protected area boundaries, daily herding and night inform responsible persons and register on the main data << Livestock properly herded at all times kraaling remaining consistently vigilant are essential first bank << Away from protected areas line defence components to prevent hyena attacks << Apart from Lion, Hyenas are probably the most << Dedicated guarding diligently watching over the livestock at all times << Hyena mostly dislike direct confrontation with humans destructive carnivore to the livestock industry in the KAZA << Implement some sort of flashing LED light system on the kraal walls rather seeking opportunity around them while all is quiet TFCA. << Strive to let the animals out earlier to graze and bring them back before sundown however recently I observed hyena threatening the camp << Hyenas have a highly developed sense of smell, sensing << Resist intimidating tactics that hyena may employ to gain access growling like a dog a noise I didn’t directly associate with even buried foreign objects. For this reason, mechanical hyena making short rushes at us reacting to meat it smelt devices such as gin-traps (no longer used) are generally in camp. It never followed through and I believe it was not effective as they are with Lion and Leopard without 8.3 Tools trying to intimidate us to leave. Following up the incident a laborious cleansing process beforehand. Tame Hyenas << Diligence with hyena researches, it would appear that hyena have have even been used to detect landmines underground! << Well-built kraals learned to successfully intimidate the occupants of donkey << Hyenas tend to move in predictable patterns, and when << Good livestock minding carts where the occupants run off leaving the donkeys to these have been finally realised have they been << LED lights the hyena successfully controlled. << Our observations are that mostly animals kraaled are let << Their sense of smell and patience once they become 8.4 Trapping and Translocation out too late in the day and brought back in the evening suspicious is truly remarkable, but with care this evasive << Trapping of individual lion using box traps with falling doors after dark when hyena are most active; mostly a logistic ability can be overcome with the decontamination of << Darting and chemical capture of entire packs: not really an option for hyena apart for research purposes issue of young boys having to attend school. Letting them equipment, using suitable lures and careful camouflage of out and bringing them back earlier would be a better the trap. option << Hyenas quickly become educated and will not return to a 9 Leopard (Panthera pardus) << The practice of not kraaling donkeys for part of the year carcass in the area they have been persecuted, but appear also needs to be addressed that is attractive to all to be less cautious away from it. Observations are that carnivores particularly if they are fitted with a bell they associate the area with the problem rather than the << Recently it has been established that cow bells fitted to tool or strategy used but if presented in a new area where indicate where wandering animals are, strongly attract lion they have not been persecuted they are less wary of bait and hyena to them presented. << Moving kraals to provide some form of rotational grazing << Like Jackal, Hyena, being canidae, tend to prefer as was practised many years ago, implementing the Lagisa following established paths to and from places of refuge. It grazing scheme in Tsholotsho, is probably the way to go is useful to locate these paths before control is attempted, combining conservation agriculture with good livestock to determine where they come from and to ascertain their minding ‘modus operandi’. << Hyena as is the case with most predators require to see << Hyenas usually occupy defined lairs in caves or holes in their prey targeting a specific individual before committing rocky outcrops or in disused anthills, but where neither to an attack rather than blindly leaping in occurs they will lie up in thickets or tall grass. << Research universally has demonstrated that to prevent this << Hyena respond to clear, amplified tape reproductions of opportunity kraals design should primarily prevent them other Hyena feeding, and so with careful planning and from seeing in and secondarily to prevent access execution may be called into a ‘shootable’ position. << Kraals may be built from several materials including living Usually they come running in, requiring quick action to fences (diamond mesh either side of commiphora species accurately shoot them. Where this fails however, they are thickets), woven matting, close set poles and even steel less likely to be caught in a similar manner again. Static panels so long as they are substantial ambush hides are not considered effective favouring << Early alert systems that include dogs are strongly advised hunting from a movable concealed provided by a vehicle << Attacking hyena generally approach from cover downwind covered with a camouflage net, constantly changing 9.1 Applicable Leopard Behavioural Traits so the kraal should be exposed in open ground as much position every 20-30 minutes. This is achieved by << Leopards are without doubt the masters of stealth of all carnivores, able to operate largely unnoticed even in urban areas as possible to discourage undetected approach moving 3-5km distances, calling for 2min, listening for 10, << They are largely solitary except for females accompanied by their young and during temporary mating rituals << With this in mind it is important to always respond to any repeating this sequence a second time and if there is no << They are almost exclusively nocturnal only venturing out late afternoon or early morning out where they feel secure signal indicating carnivore approach to prevent an attack response, either a response call or they come running in, << Their secretive nature and successful hunting techniques allow them to survive even in the most unlikely of places, and are before it occurs drive on and try another 3-5km further covering the much more widespread than is imagined << Hyenas like most carnivores are suspicious of flashing LED district this way throughout the night. Hyena dislike << Leopard are not thought to move great distances as do Lion rather occupying smaller territories preying on smaller animals lights that are properly placed at regular intervals 7-10 spotlights so preferably they should be hunted without that are found in greater numbers. Their predominant prey depends largely on the species most common to the area they metres set at approach height the aid of one; where this is not possible, turn it on (using occupy. << Both Niteguard and the PREDeter versions are a second person) the second they run in. The use of << Leopards lie up during the day in a wide variety of habitat that best enables them to retreat and operate from. Broken recommended sophisticated night vision equipment is helpful to improve country, rocky hillocks and granite outcrops are favoured refuge spots that are more inhospitable to move through while << Burning fires and manned guard positions may also be results. enabling them to see longer distances but they will readily occupy stands of denser trees in open savannah or riverine necessary to deal with chronic situations << Around camp sites or to protect valuable equipment, vegetation in fact some surprising locations because they are so secretive << Modern IT technology has enabled the electronic Hyena may be deterred by electrically charged fencing or << Livestock not night kraaled are at particular risk recording of data on line and while it is understood that polywire around the camp or object.

A28 A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. A29 KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures

<< Individual animals that lag behind on return to the kraals that end up sleeping outside are extremely vulnerable Trained dogs are extremely effective for the control of problem Leopards. Experienced dogs provide security for the hunting of << Good livestock minding including daily herding and night kraaling, being consistently vigilant are essential first line defence problem leopard particularly while following up on a wounded animal, distracting and baying the Leopard until it can be components to prevent leopard attacks despatched. This approach may be used for the darting of problem Leopard to relocate them as the bayed leopard << Leopard problems most often occur when small livestock are placed in the immediate vicinity of an occupied den. By concentrates upon the dogs rather than persons firing the radio-tracking dart. simply by repositioning the livestock stockade further away often serves to alleviate the problem. Young livestock are particularly vulnerable so should be kraaled away from known Leopard habitat providing the best long term option 9.4 Keep Them Out – Proper Kraaling in Well-Constructed Kraals is Essential << Leopard play a large role in reducing baboon and bush pig numbers down to a tolerable level in a farming or communal << Must not be able to see in or out of night kraals land environment so their presence should be rather encouraged and the farming activities planned around them to reduce << Smaller kraals suggested built providing solid walls conflict. << Providing a roof at the top << Often when leopard attack livestock in a confined space where livestock are unable to escape, they will kill indiscriminately << Exposed as much as possible until all struggling ceases fuelled by the enclosure preventing the non-targeted animals to escape << Livestock properly herded at all times << Leopard like most animals attacking require to see their prey, targeting a specific individual before committing to an attack << Away from protected areas rather than blindly leaping in << Dedicated guarding diligently watching over the livestock at all times << Research universally has demonstrated that to prevent this opportunity, kraal design should primarily prevent them from << Suggest dogs used to warn of eminent attack seeing in and secondarily prevent access << Implement some sort of flashing LED light system on the kraal walls << For leopard, standard cattle design kraals are not advised, rather opting for much smaller replicas but with the roof closed in << Strive to let the animals out earlier to graze and bring them back before sundown to prevent access from the top << Kraals may be built from several materials including living fences (diamond mesh either side of commiphora species thickets), woven matting, close set poles and even steel panels so long as they are substantial 9.5 Tools << Early alert systems that include dogs are strongly advised << Diligence << Attacking leopard generally approach from cover downwind so the kraal should be exposed in open ground as much as << Well-built kraals possible to discourage undetected approach from this direction << Good livestock minding << With this in mind it is important to always respond to any disturbance indicating carnivore approach to prevent an attack << LED lights before it occurs << Leopards are suspicious of flashing LED lights that are properly placed at regular intervals 7-10 metres set at approach 9.6 Problem Leopard - Management of Habituated Individuals height << Lethal control options << Both Niteguard and the PREDeter versions are recommended << PAC hunting << Burning fires and manned guard positions may also be necessary to deal with chronic reoccurring situations << Culling << Modern IT technology has enabled the electronic recording of data on line and while it is understood that many communities do not have cell towers at present, communication towers for rural communities are expanding fast. There are 9.7 Trapping and Translocation many options including SMS Frontline, KoBoCollect that maybe considered that automatically inform responsible persons << Trapping of individual lion using box traps with falling doors and register on the main data bank << Darting and chemical capture of leopard: There are a number of drug combinations presently used most operators favouring a Zoletil Medetomidine cocktail (Kock & Burrows 2013). 9.2 Trapping and Chemical Capture: Where Leopard have not been previously hunted they can be trapped reasonably easily however where they have been 10 Cheetah (Acinonyx jubatus) “educated” they become extremely cunning. Leopard invariably have a preferred species of prey they mostly attack, so where live bait is employed to attract them, it is important to use the species they prefer to prey upon, which may differ considerably depending on locality.

They are however particularly fond of dogs, and will go to great lengths to obtain them, even to enter occupied houses to obtain them that may be used. Patience is essential when attempting to trap Leopard, as they quickly become suspicious and often will not return for several days. By patiently waiting, even for several weeks, one is usually rewarded. Leopards have traditionally been trapped using cage traps but more recently the humane leg hold cable snare has proved a better option resulting in less injury to the captured cat and more hits for effort and time spent trying to trap them. This system however is definitely not recommended by the novice as it requires considerable experience and know how to properly position and set the trap to prevent injury to persons and the leopard while improving the chances of success.

Chemical capture without trapping is generally not considered an option as they are not as easy to dart in the same way as Lions are, so preference should be given to trapping first, followed by an immobilising drug administering either Zoletil/ medetomidine or Ketamine/medetomidine combinations, before they are handled (Botma & Dutoit, 2010).

9.3 Translocation Concerns There are concerns trans-locating problem leopard to other areas, that each situation need a thorough investigation to prevent mal adjustment of the animal in already inhabited situations. As new founder populations in uninhabited territory, this would be a good option however, in Namibia collared leopard all returned to their places of capture.

Hunting: 10.1 Applicable Behavioural Traits Leopards are extremely valuable to the hunting industry, and where destruction of one becomes necessary it is profitable to sell << Cheetah as with most carnivores, are opportunists, so ranching cattle, particularly breeding stock with calves and small it through the safari industry. Currently the most effective method to hunt leopard is from a well prepared hide overlooking a stock, risk being targeted. The problem is exasperated where livestock increases to the detriment of naturally occurring bait site, usually in a tree using rheostat controlled lighting facilities to reduce the risk of spooking the Leopard before shooting. wildlife even although cheetahs prefer to take wildlife rather than livestock. Again it is essential that this is carried out by persons experienced in hunting leopard. << Cheetah have many enemies, including Hyena and Lion, which often drive them off their kills. On commercial ranches however, these are largely absent and so Cheetah provide greater impact. A30 A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. A31 KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures

<< Cheetahs devour as much as possible after a successful << During the heat of the day Cheetah, depending on the << Night kraals should still be used to ward off attacks by other animals kill, quickly moving on to escape other predators, and level of exhaustion, can quite often be approached closely << Livestock properly herded at all times consequently do not return to their kills. with a vehicle moving in slowly at an angle, provided << Away from protected areas << Cheetahs generally do not scavenge, but kill anew each no one is on the outside and the noise kept down to a << Dedicated guarding diligently watching over the livestock at all times time. Their mode of attack is to panic and chase down minimum. their quarry, tripping it before pouncing on it then << Capture and translocation success in Namibia has been strangling by the throat. Stationary quarry or a ‘face off’ achieved, by identifying urination spots often 10.4 Tools situation is largely avoided but are executed by the cat characterised by ‘marking trees’, placing open ended cage << Diligence striking down on its back and side with the developed traps around them, with thorn bushes in between the << Well-built kraals dewclaw, collapsing it to permit repositioning to finally traps to ensure the only access is through the traps. Two << Good livestock minding strangle it. cage traps are adjoined with open doors set at each end << Specially designed box traps with falling doors << Cheetah are not aggressive in the sense that both Lion and to provide a tunnel, which are tripped simultaneously by Leopard are, rather they avoid confrontation, killing only a false floor ‘base plate’ in the middle as the Cheetah runs when they dictate the situation so that they respond less through capturing it in between. 11 Wild Dog or Painted Dog (Lycaon pictus) to being attracted to bait, dead or alive and so must be << Fences in occupied areas may serve to funnel cheetah attracted some other way when trapping them. into traps as they often pass by alongside fences so placing << Their lack of aggression is the reason livestock can be a circular boma against the fence may encourage them to effectively protected by using minders in the form of enter inadvertently through some sort of gate or non- people, dogs, donkeys and other animals to aggressively return system that may be added. repel and chase them off rather than opting for << Cheetah in the past have been successfully captured using translocation or lethal control the plastic boma technique when on a few occasions << Although Cheetah are true cats, part of the Felidae family Cheetah happened to be spotted close by during routine of animals, in terms of behaviour, they behaviourally capture operations seem neither to fall into the cat nor dog family but rather << Cheetah running at full speed quickly tire and bay up after somewhere in between, displaying traits of both. More a couple hundred metres, discussed above, providing like canines, they respond positively to scent left by other opportunity for quick and deft physical capture. When Cheetah, calling stations that all passing cheetah cornered, they often will climb into the branches of a low investigate, where they may be lured. tree providing opportunity for experienced handlers to << Cheetah hunt almost exclusively during the day grab and restrain them while administering a narcotic drug approaching quarry stealthily using anthills and bushes to directly intravenously. approach close enough to facilitate the final rush no more << Research in Namibia has indicated that passageways may than 100 metres away. Chases over 300 metres are rare be provided through fences to allow cheetah to enter and often terminated by the cheetah itself exit wildlife preserves providing connected long distance << The effort is exhausting so is calculated to ensure success corridors reducing density effectively enabling the hunting within this distance an approximately 40% success rate of natural prey over a wider area rather than stock raiding recorded in Namibia with fawns providing much better in the surrounding communities. The name change from the Wild dog to Painted hunting << Livestock predation: Information gathered during the success nearer100% << Various techniques are employed to protect livestock on dog was a rebranding effort to help move pictus off vermane incursion in the Doma district in Zimbabwe, suggests that << Cheetah as do all carnivores target an individual, but do commercial ranches and in some communities employing status. most stock were taken early in the morning before 10am. not seek animals that lag behind or are sick, but rather some very novel ideas to repel them using the Anatolian The pack remains at the carcass until it is completely one deemed to be the most vulnerable for the surprise Sheppard Dog and donkeys, even wildebeest that remain consumed, and if disturbed they will not return. attack. Often in terrain that is more open they may with the specific sheep or goat herd adopting them as 11.1 Applicable Behavioural Traits << Painted Dog like cheetah are largely diurnal in habit often << Protection can be achieved by kraaling the cattle close to approach until detected and then rush toward the group, their own family. the homestead at night and by providing a livestock guard/ not fully committed until they lock onto an individual and << Communities are also encouraged to synchronise cattle restricting their activities to the early mornings, late afternoons and on into the evenings on hot days. minder with the cattle during the day until the dogs have accelerate towards it. Where cover is available they rather births to lessen the vulnerable time that they are moved on. stalk approaching to provide a more opportune final susceptible to attack and the transmitted cattle disease << Observations in Southern Africa indicate that often the dogs are not resident in one area for any length of time, << Capture and translocation: The capture of the entire attack distance (Estes 1991). malignant catarrhal by wildebeest. pack is now possible, based upon work started in Kruger << Their remarkable flexible design structure, oxygen and << Urine and faeces from foreign Cheetah has been used moving in large circles of approximately 100km in diameter, seldom returning to the same area twice a year. National Park and independently in Zimbabwe. But there heat management achieves rush speeds in access of successfully to attract problem Cheetah. Urine from a are major hurdles which have to be thought through and 100km/hour but the effort exhausts the carnivore neutered female is also reported to be successful in this Where possible therefore, a policy of protecting the livestock at the logistical considerations before the translocation should requiring at least 30 minutes to recuperate before trying regard: Bill Mcbride pers. comms. Captured cheetah may be attempted. Most importantly, the entire pack has to again be used in this role. vulnerable time until the pack moves on would be more appropriate. be moved together as if individuals are removed, the << Cheetah occur both singularly and small groups << As Cheetahs are protected animals lethal control is not pack unity, which they rely upon to hunt successfully, is comprising either a female with offspring or sibling males acceptable. << Observations are that painted dog prefer to keep away from communities preferring wildlife areas and mixed broken up. To achieve this, the alpha female must initially remaining together as a coalition enabling them to hunt be radio collared to monitor the pack’s movement, to bigger prey, females separating at 2 years of age game/livestock wild areas 10.2 Planning and Strategy << Estes asserts that painted dog are the most successful of positively locate the active den used to enable the proper << Both male and female Cheetah are strongly territorial << Maintain passage ways through ‘cheetah window’ through positioning of the capture boma, while ensuring the dogs defending their respective home ranges however these predators rarely failing to effectively hunt even several protected area times a day, capable of changing home ranges and pack remain in the vicinity when the operation is planned. In constantly change particularly for the males to maximise << Minimise access to livestock Zimbabwe, painted dog have been caught using the advantage of prey migration formations frequently surviving major calamities, quickly << Incorporate human and animal minders responding by rapid population increase plastic boma technique with drop nets set up inside at << Unlike lion while there is a formal greeting, social bonds the end of the boma to ensnare the individuals. It is my are not fostered so that individuals of coalitions refrain << Painted dog are extremely prone to all the canine diseases 10.3 Keep Them Out – Proper Herding including distemper and rabies quickly wiping out entire conviction that better results would be achieved using the from rubbing up against one another or even being in too standard net boma being easier to camouflage and more close in proximity << Incorporate an animal minder imprinted on each herd to packs but even disease is not thought to be the most effec- chase away cheetah tive control influence on populations quickly set up. A32 A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. A33 KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures

<< Once the pack runs into the boma, they become may be the force that effectively achieves this. Even when the << In the communal areas it is usually reoccurring rabies Farmers allowing dogs into their staff dwellings should be ensnared in drop lines where they are physically herds return they have the knowledge of the wider field to outbreaks that sweep through the population significantly aware of this, and ensure that all dogs on their property restrained and immobilised using Zoletil at a rate of venture to in hard times or in productive times to expand reducing numbers as they quickly build up. are adequately vaccinated. 2-3mg/kg (a total dose of 50mg), or Ketamine/Xylazine << Jackals are most active from sunset through the night to << Jackals, as is the case with hyena, mostly commute along combination at 5mg Ketamine and 0,5mg Xylazine per kg. sunrise but maybe seen during the day sunning them- well-defined paths rendering them vulnerable to most More recently 0,5mg Zoletil/kg and0,03-0,05 mg 11.3 Planning and Strategy selves when undisturbed. lethal control techniques. Coyote getters provide the most Medetomidine/kg is recommended, the average mass << Daily patrolling by qualified tracker scouts is essential to << They occur singly (predominately non-territorial successful means of control. However, if poisoning is being 25-30kg for adults accurately monitor game, livestock and carnivore wanderers), territorial pairs, or in family groups comprising required to control populations over large areas, treating << Under capture conditions, painted dog are not as movement and activity of parents and their most recent offspring. tallow baits with “Compound 1080” toxicant is aggressive as one would imagine, being totally << Vigilance is essential to quickly discover the arrival of the << The food source becomes concentrated during the calving considered an extremely effective alternative, with baiting overwhelmed by the activities around them. dogs to the area and their general movement patterns season and packs of black-backed jackal can wreak havoc done near stock kraals or along the paths that they most << An alternative capture system, the den may be << Mobilise minders to limit Lycaon access to livestock amongst small livestock, killing and maiming many frequently use (the canidae family are particularly surrounded with a camp trap or the whelps removed and << Consider temporary fencing a smaller more manageable animals. They can also inflict severe damage to susceptible to sodium monofluoracetate (compound placed into a separate cage to act as bait, and the cage area until the dogs move on fully-grown cattle, sometimes attacking weakened cows in 1080) so that it is possible to reduce toxicant levels to sub traps to capture the others then placed so that they can the process of calving down. They attack and feed on the lethal to other forms of wildlife but remain lethal to the only approach the whelps through the cage trap door. 11.4 Keep Them Out – Proper Herding placenta and new-born calves during the calving process dog family) << Night kraals should still be used to ward off attacks by where cows are unable to defend themselves; they will << Jackals are curious by nature so are easily attracted to 11.2 The Painted Dog Broadening other animals often eat into the cow through the vulva for example. visual cues such as a tuft of feathers blowing in the wind << Livestock properly herded at all times These situations, although not common, are almost or scent lures that enable the trapping of them in drop Boundary Knowledge Hypothesis << Dedicated guarding diligently watching over the livestock impossible to reverse, requiring the control of the entire door single cage designs or camp traps Providing for a wider memory dynamic view for prey species. at all times problem pack while improving on surveillance and the << The effectiveness of general jackal control (large-scale This hypothesis contends that boundary knowledge for the management of livestock to eliminate this practice. killing) is questionable and consensus is rather use barriers different prey herds in an area is largely either forced or << In the advent of a rabies outbreak, it has been found that that exclude them. brought in by dispersal males, never deduced. Herd 11.5 Tools the control of all jackals near the outbreak is probably << Jackal proof fencing it seems is the most effective means dominance generally confines a particular herd preventing << Diligence fruitless as the jackal themselves quickly succumb to the of protecting livestock provided it is well managed and redistribution or recolonization so it is possible that major << Well-built kraals disease. Observations when outbreaks occur are generally maintained disturbance catalysis’s such as brought on by painted dog << Good livestock minding associated with increased Jackal population density so it is considered better to reduce the populations immediately 12.2 Planning and Strategy 12 Black-Backed Jackal (Canis mesomelas) outside the area of the rabies outbreak in an attempt to << Keep all domestic dogs vaccinated against rabies. reduce animal to animal contact, effectively minimising << Place all lame, incapacitated animals and cows having contact between animals effectively limiting spread difficulty in calving under direct protection. << There is scientific evidence (C. Foggin, pers. comm.) << Discourage unusual jackal build up. suggesting that rabies is not held in the jackal population, << Consider the use of toxicants only if necessary. but rather in the population of domestic dogs in the area that remain unvaccinated that then spreads into and is sustained in the jackal population. It is suggested that an 12.3 Keep Them Out – Vigilance and outbreak reaches a tipping point when the disease crosses Active Repellence Action into the jackal population. Logic dictating that if it were << Apply jackal proof fencing possible to vaccinate the entire dog population, rabies << Guard dogs would die out completely (D. Cummings pers. comm.). << Separate and kraal infirm animals

13 Quelea (Quelea quelea lathemii)

12.1 Applicable Behavioural Traits weakened state. << The primary species of Jackal posing a threat to farmers is << They are susceptible to canine diseases particularly rabies the black-backed jackal, not the side-striped jackal (Canis and distemper which they do transmit before succumbing adustus). themselves. << Although omnivorous feeding on plants, insects and << Major fluctuations in jackal population densities are often rodents they also scavenge and kill birds and small the result of other primary environmental imbalances. livestock. These are often associated with macro farming and << They often are victims of secondary poisoning not livestock activities, while reducing prey species, more than primarily feeding on the carcasses but from feeding on compensates with the provision of improvised the dung, taking up in undigested grain still contaminated opportunities such as cattle dung, offal and waste during lethal baboon control exercises using toxicants. vegetable matter in an environment. This is particularly << Given the opportunity, they will raid poultry, sheep and true where most predators are largely absent from goats as well as cattle when found in an extreme large-scale commercial farms.

A34 A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. A35 KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures

13.1 Applicable BehaviouralTraits did fully engorged themselves. is reliably found generally leave the night roosts first each morning which then the others that do not follow the majority << Quelea are extremely gregarious birds, congregating << At the same time because of the localised food source lead. The successful removal or controlled taste conditioning cta of early scouts locating new opportunities effectively wherever possible depending upon food availability and Quelea occupy large night roosts nearby from which they prevents the birds ever discovering its location. This has been demonstrated using specific bird repellents such as Mesurol™ distribution. forage from and return to each day or low concentrations of toxicant Azodrin™ in the past spraying the edges of lands that generally develop quicker << They are closely related to other species of the Weaver << Quelea usually reoccupy a roost used the previous season family, but are unique in their behavioural pattern, enabling easy monitoring of their build up. Roosts are 13.2 Planning and Strategy capable of moving considerable distances each year generally less numerous, but larger as the season << Active destruction of nests and fledglings during breeding during the breeding season to take advantage of seasonal progresses, suggesting that as more of the birds begin to << Good bird minding that includes active chasing away of birds alighting onto the crop using a variety of improvised tools timing of rains in the sub region, with 1100 km recorded be attracted to the crop they abandon the smaller roosts << Small scale trapping of Quelea has been successfully carried out using standard box traps covered with ½ inch bird mesh on one occasion. for the larger ones, even if these may be situated of 1mx1m square 300mm high providing several tapered funnels of ± 250mm length around the edge leading in, adopting << The escalation of numbers into vast locust like proportions further away. Should early heavy rains, lasting several days the ‘fish trap’ principle so that birds wandering in do not find their way out. Several traps are placed around the lands and provides a further downside to macro farming activities occur early in the season before the wheat is harvested, especially at the corners and seed placed both around the trap and within to attract them. Results indicate better results that reduces natural constraints on their numbers Quelea build-up thereafter is often greater inflicting more when a few birds are left in after the removal of the majority to attract others providing for a rapid population increase. damage, possibly, because any natural food left begins to << Various designs of catapult traps are devised among communities where birds are attracted to seed bait on the ground that << In Zimbabwe under the land redistribution program germinate and is no longer available to the birds. is then triggered maiming and killing the feeding birds for food. Most of these employ inner tube rubber set 2 metres apart where some large-scale commercial agricultural land has << Quelea flying back to a roost behave in a characteristic pulled back on a manual trigger arrangement deployed manually when many birds are feeding been parcelled out to subsistence farmers, a reduction manner, as they begin to congregate in the late evening in large tracts of land under one crop has also effectively along set routes, usually along vlei/river lines or field edges reduced the intensity of the Quelea problem. This as they dislike moving over open ground, where they are 13.3 Keep Them Out – Vigilance and Active Repellence Action < observation along with other macro forms of agriculture more vulnerable. They generally tend to move directly to < String fences and streamers around the edge and within lands < clearly indicates responsibility that commercial farming a water source first before the roost site at sunset. As they < Scare crows < has to take cognisance of, situations where they have move along defined corridors, they can easily be followed < Wind effected plastic sheeting and bags < effectively reversed mechanisms to naturally limit to the roost from the ground, even if it takes several days < Bangers and other noise providers such as whips < population levels to do so, commencing each evening where following was < Active Human presence << For Quelea to reproduce in large numbers each year, abandoned the previous evening until the roost is located. they require specific conditions found in the semi-arid << Quelea usually arrive at the roost some 10 minutes before 13.4 Tools areas south and north of the central watershed below the sunset, and continue arriving for 20–25 minutes << Catapults 1200-meter contour line. These areas provide sufficient thereafter. An estimate of roost size is best assessed at this << Traps food through annual grasses, timely insect flush to provide time determining the pattern and flock sizes entering the food for their young and Acacia type thickets in which to roost over this period. build their nests. << During observations of a roost, confusion may occur when << Quelea move to these low lying areas with the onset of the birds seemingly occupy a vast area, flying up and the rains in November, when the natural grass seeds have down the entire reed bed. This is particularly noticeable begun to germinate no longer available in the Highveld at where they have been continuously disturbed, however this time. at last light will usually establish their final true roosting << It is probable that late rainfall in the breeding areas, after position when they all will have concentrated together, the Quelea have begun their move down, has a strong usually in an area confirmed by clearly demarcated areas controlling influence upon population numbers. of excreta... the amount of excrement of course, << Research has indicated that there is a strong correlation dependent on the duration of occupation between rainfall received affecting food production in << Traditionally during the breeding phase, Quelea birds these areas, and Quelea build up the following season, are harvested by any manner of means including direct that is not at all related to the number of birds controlled picking of nestlings and capture of adults using nets. In the in any one season. roosting stage, the avicide Queletox is sprayed on using a << Quelea breed successfully up to three times in any one number of aerial and ground spraying rigs which is season where perfect breeding conditions continue to effective to control even the largest roost. Control by prevail owing to breeding synchronisation and short avicide is the responsibility of the PWMA Department’s nesting/fledgling/dispersal time. Quelea Bird Unit in Zimbabwe to whom all roosts must << Following breeding from November through to March, be reported by law. they spread out in smaller flocks to take advantage of the << Quelea harvesting for human consumption not only solves more widely spread food sources. a HWC problem but also provides a valuable source of << When the grass seed begins to fall off in amongst rank protein to communities that may develop the potential grass, Quelea are effectively unable to reach it at the same further to harvest them commercially. Obviously this will time commercial wheat crops mature to the ‘soft dough’ require the development of alternate mechanical tech- stage providing them with an alternative food source, at niques not involving toxicants compliant with stringent the right moment. health laws and there has been some progress to develop << Quelea respond by concentrating around this improvised some doable ideas in this regard food source, forming large swarms to take advantage of << Control of early scouts: - Birds it seems, like animals are the timely concentration of the food source. Interestingly unable to deduce the whereabouts of food from mere research indicates that even so Quelea still prefer natural observation but have either to stumble upon it directly food growing within and around the wheat; Samples or be taken to it following another bird that has previous taken of birds feeding within the wheat, indicate that only knowledge. Trials observing other flocking species of birds ±30% of the birds fed upon the crop itself but those that has indicated that individual birds that know where food

A36 A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. A37 KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures

Appendix 3 << Does the organizer know the visitors? Appendix 4 << Is there a hosting agreement form that includes a question regarding criminal convictions or other contra-indicators? Mechanisms for the Exchange << Has the safety and wellbeing of the visitors during travel Photographs of Experiences considered? 1 Photos of Human-Wildlife Conflict in Africa. << Does this include appropriate drivers and transport whilst Exchange visits aim at benefiting all participants through an with the host organization? open exchange of ideas, knowledge, and sound practices. << Does work experience feature as part of the exchange and The host organization should expect to gain as much from the does it require an assessment by an appropriate person experience as the visitors. In HWC, exchange of about any significant hazards the work environment may resources, technology, and knowledge between individuals present? (such as KLOs), government officials, farmers and others << Is there a contingency plan in place that considers un- develops crucial capacity and relationships between actors, foreseen events, such as emergencies, severe weather or fostering cooperation in the KAZA. The purpose of these the requirement to find alternative accommodation if it exchange visits is to allow managers and other stakeholders becomes necessary to move the visitors from their host to benefit from lessons learnt from successful experiences to organization/country or community? Useful to check the build operational responses tailored to their own needs. rules and regulations governing the country. © L Osborn << Exchange visits could be also at higher level for learning Key principles experience in the management of natural resources. << Exchange visits provide valuable and often unique experiences for all people to be involved to experience other cultures, develop new ideas, friendships and thus Pre-Visits broaden their horizons and knowledge. If it is a first time visit, or involving a significant number of << Staying with a host organization/family/community may new staff, a preliminary visit is necessary as it may reassure all give the visitors a first-hand opportunity to use their parties and provide details and photographs for a presentation © M. La Grange learned HWC mitigation skills in a real context. to all parties concerned. This will serve as a control measure << By following national best practice and standard in itself as well as being an opportunity to consider a specific guidelines, it will be possible to establish, manage and risk assessment first hand. The issues raised in ‘Risk maintain safe and productive exchange visits. Management’ (see above) should be considered during a preliminary visit and discussed with colleagues on both sides Summary of Guidance of exchange. Expectations and assurances should be established for all parties involved (farmers affected by conflict, KLOs, Language Capability community leaders, representatives from HWC mitigation The majority of the exchange visits involving parks authorities/ practicing organizations and/or establishments) and these government representatives etc. are language based and thus must be fair and reciprocal as far as is reasonably practicable. normally include language staff as group leaders. It is © L Osborn Provision of specific guidance for host partners about the important that there is someone who can act in the interests visitors’ expectations is critical so is the provision of guidance of the group who is available 24 hours and able to communi- for visitors on what entails covering personal safety. Exchange cate fluently. Visit leaders should ensure this is in place prior visits differ from other visits in that, there is no direct to the visit. supervision of the visitors by teachers or workers etc. whilst they are with the host parties; exchanges thus require Personal Safety thorough and carefully planned risk management. Careful Staff should also be aware of issues relating to personal safety

matching of exchange partners is central to successful visits. and professional protection, especially in order to avoid ©A. Stronza situations that could lead to accusations of improper conduct. Preparation and Planning Research prior to the visit in this respect will pay dividends Additional Considerations whilst in the host country. A consideration of what constitutes The recommended additional procedures and advice are as good manners will help with acceptance in host communities. follows: An advanced planning visit is essential. As part of the In addition to assessing risks inherent in any external visit, risk assessment process, it should be considered whether an there are additional risks relating to exchange visits that will appropriately trained person be part of the staff team. Check require extra consideration. In order to reduce the possibility whether travel insurance covers pre-existing health of harm it will be necessary to consider additional control conditions. If not, insure with a company that specialises in measures, some of which may be Are the visitors and hosts policies for these young people. Availability of interpreter and carefully matched with due regard to gender, diet, religious leader trained if required in the appropriate communication belief, special needs etc.? medium i.e. sign language. A suitable social area should be © L Osborn available for group meetings etc. Capture and translocation. Elephant crossing an electrified fence in Sengwa, Zimbabwe. Concerted community noise and fire repellent. Problem elephant captured and translocated after entering commercial farmlands in Zimbabwe. Elephants crossing the road in northern Botswana. Elephants can threaten homesteads. Conflict with lions. A38 A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. A39 KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures © Nick and Helen Pickard © Courtesy Angola Ministry of Environment © L Osborn © Rachel McRob © A. Songhurst © L Osborn © L. Osborn © L. Osborn © A. Songhurst © A. Songhurst © A. Songhurst

Hippo being butchered on the banks of the Kavango River in Angola (copy from Parks office Mucassa, Angola). Elephant speared, Kenya Elephants drinking out of pool at high-end houses in a private game reserve South Africa. Snared elephant Destroyed grain bin in the Zambezi Valley Crop and property damage by elephants Elephants killed on problem animal control Problem baboons in southern Africa Removing tusks from an elephant killed on problem animal control Elephant pulling down cable fence Problem animal control meat distribution A40 A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. A41 KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures

2. Different Types of Deterrents © L. Osborn © L Osborn © L Osborn © L. Osborn © L Osborn © M. La Grange © L Osborn © L Osborn © M. La Grange © M. La Grange

Assorted noise makers: ultrasonic, firecrackers, sirens, vuvuzelas (bugles) © L. Osborn © L. Osborn Firecrackers dispensed by crossbow Chilli-dung briquettes Paint-gun pistol with chilli-filled paint balls Decoy raptors in wheat fields

A42 A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. A43 KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures © L Osborn © M. Karidozo © L. Osborn © L. Osborn © L. Osborn © M. La Grange © L Osborn © M. La Grange © L. Osborn © L. Osborn © L. Osborn © L Osborn © L. Osborn

Watch tower at night in Zimbabwe Bee-hive fence in the Okavango Homemade flash bangs in Zimbabwe Log-hive at the water hole in the mid-Zambezi Valley, Zimbabwe Guard post/watch tower Light system employed for predators in Zimbabwe Applying chilli grease to a fence in Namibia Fire (Julbernadia pinaculata and Acacia nigresens stumps used in fields) Chilli grease Trenches in Uganda SEKA Theatre Group in Luangwa Valley, Zambia Chilli demonstration plots and young farmers in Livingstone, Zambia

A44 A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. A45 KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures

3. Different Types of Fences © L. Osborn © M. La Grange © M. La Grange © L. Osborn © M. La Grange © M. La Grange © M. La Grange © M. La Grange © M. La Grange © M. La Grange © M. La Grange © M. La Grange © M. La Grange © M. La Grange Traditional fencing Chilli gas grenade, launcher and chilli gas sprayer Game-proof electric fencing Miripiri bomber Commiphora africana used as hedge fence. Ambush chilli educator Fence of Euphorbia pinicalli Chilli gun pepper strike Fence of Jatropha curcas Silver foil in plastic bottles around fields help deter animals Visual barrier of reeds- (particularly important with predators) Wood and reeds Stone fence A46 A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. A47 KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures

Appendix 5 Construction of a Barrier for Protection Against Crocodiles Water Access point barriers – construction guide (From Mentzel, C. & Niskanen, 2014)

The Revised Version of the Proposed Barrier is as Follows; The barrier comprises a curved floating boom and a curtain of steel chain which hangs from the boom to the bed of the river. The boom is anchored at both ends at the shore.

We believe that a large number of these smaller type barriers will work better than a small number of large enclosures. Communities will use these more readily than one large enclosure that many people use. © L Osborn The proposed structure is best described in pictures – see below; © L. Osborn © Mentzel, C. & Niskanen

Woman constructing a string fence in Zimbabwe Potential for human/crocodile conflict. Photograph of fencing against crocodiles (“croc-proof pools”) - allowing people access to water on a river bank. These structures are most successful in slow-flowing river sections without massive water level fluctuation. Innovative high voltage electric fences in Livingstone, Zambia: M. Karidozo

Hanging from the floating boom will be a “curtain” of steel chain welded into a net. This chain will reach the bed of the river and will rest on the river bed. In fast flowing water it may be necessary to anchor the chain curtain to river bed by attaching it to rocks.

Above the floating boom that supports the chain curtain, there will be 0.5m of vertical wall in steel to prevent crocodiles from coming over the barrier into the protected pool.

The shallow sides near the anchor points and the landward side of the protected pool can be secured with modular sections of steel fence as previously proposed , if a complete circle of barrier is required, as suggested by communities and fiscails at recent meetings.

A48 A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. A49 KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures

References

African Elephant Specialist Group (1998) Report of the African Elephant Specialist Group, IUCN, Species Survival Commission African Elephant Specialist Group (2000) Fencing and other barriers against problem elephants. AfESG Technical Brief Series. IUCN African Elephant Specialist Group, Human Elephant Conflict Working Group. Available at: http://www.africanelephant .org/hec/pdfs/hecfencen.pdf African Elephant Specialist Group (2002) Review of compensation schemes for agricultural and other damage caused by elephants. Technical brief, Human- Elephant Conflict Working Group, African Elephant Specialist Group, IUCN, Gland, Switzerland. Allaway, J. D. (1979) Elephants and their interaction with people in the Tana River region of Kenya, Unpublished PhD Thesis, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York. Anstey, S. (2010) HEC Vertical integration model, Mozambique and Tanzania. IUCN AfESG, Nairobi. Anon, M. (2000) Report of the Central Unit Anti-Poaching Unit, Guruve RDC, Mushumbi Pools. 12 PGs typescript. Anderson, J.L and Pariela, F., (2005) Strategies to mitigate human-wildlife conflicts in Mozambique, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations Rome, Italy. Arntzen, J. W., D.L. Molokomme, E. M. Terry, N. Moleele, O. Tshosa and D. Mazambani. (2003) Final Report of the Review of Community-Based Natural Resource Management in Botswana. Report prepared by the Centre for Applied Research for the National CBNRM forum. Gaborone. Baldwin G. & La Grange M, (2013) Chemical Control of the Chacma Baboon (Papio ursinus) The advantage of this design is that the uneven and irregular shape of the river bed can be completely covered by the chain on Hippo Valley and Triangle Sugar Estates Chiredzi - Internal report. curtain. This prevents gaps at the base where crocodiles could get into the protected pool. Barnes, R. F. W. (1996) The conflict between humans and elephants in the central African forests.Mammal Review, 26(2/3): 67-80. The second advantage of this design is that these units are small enough to be moved up and down the bank with changes in Barnes, R. F. W. (2002) Treating crop raiding elephants with aspirin. Pachyderm, 33, 96-99. water level. The difficulty of a large fixed barrier is that it is at risk of being swept away by flood water. Bell, R. H. V. (1984) The man-animal interface: an assessment of crop damage and wildlife control in Conservation and Wildlife This design will also be easier to install and use in places where there is deep or fast running water, so is less restricted in the Management in Africa: Bell, R. H.V. and Mcshane-Caluzi (Eds.) US Peace Corps Seminar, Malawi. places it can be used. Bennett, A. F. (2003) Linkages in the landscape: The role of corridors and connectivity in wildlife conservation. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland. For protection of places that have still water and a shallow slope into the water (such as sites in lakes and dams), the initial de- Bendsen, H. and T. Meyer (2003) The Dynamics of the Land Use Systems in Ngamiland: Changing Livelihood Options and sign using modular panels (see above) can be used. This barrier can be produced as a pilot project for installation at the agreed Strategies. Harry Oppenheimer Okavango Research Centre and German Development Service – DED, Maun, site in Tete at a cost of US$5 538 per 2.5 x 5m barrier. Botswana Bennett, A.F., (2003). Linkages in the Landscape: The Role of Corridors and Connectivity in Wildlife Conservation. IUCN Gland, This price does not include the modular fencing to 1m high on the land side – this is an optional extra that can be produced for Switzerland and Cambridge, UK. US$80 per panel of 1.4m width. This strategy could be expanded to a national programme. Berger, L.R. (2006) Predatory Bird Damage to the Taung Type-Skull of Australopithecus africanus (Dart 1925). American Journal of Physical Anthropology, 131:166–168. Binot, A, Blomley T, Coad, L, Nelson F, Roe, D, and Sandbrook, C, (2009) Community Involvement in natural resources management in Africa: Regional overviews, in Roe, D, Nelson, F, and SandBrook, C (eds) Community management of natural resources in Africa: impacts, experience and future directions IIED, London, UK. Blanc, J.J., Barnes, R.F.W. Craig, G.C. Dublin, H.T. Thouless, C.R. Douglas-Hamilton, I. and Hart, J.A. (2007) African Elephant Status Report 2007: An Update from the African Elephant Database. IUCN, Gland B. M. A. Oswin Perera (2009). The Human-Elephant Conflict: A Review of Current Status and Mitigation Methods,Gajaha, 30; 41-52. Bourquin S.L, & Shacks V.A. (2015) Okavango Crocodile Monitoring Programme: Past, Present and Future. Botswana Sympo- sium on Wetlands and Wildlife, Natural resource research: Implications for management and conservation. Okavango Research Institute, University of Botswana, Maun, Botswana. Boudreaux, K. C. (2010) Community Conservation in Namibia: Devolution as a Tool for the Legal Empowerment of the Poor. Working Paper, No. 10-64. Boudreaux, K. (2005) The role of Property Rights as an Institution: Implications for Development Policy, Mercatus Policy Series no. 2, Mercatus Centre at George Mason University, Airlington, VA. Bowen-Jones, E. (2012) Financial mechanisms for addressing Human Wildlife Conflict; with particular reference to institutional aspects therein. IIED Case Study Summaries. Bulte, E.H. & Rondeau, D. (2005): Why compensating wildlife damages may be bad for conservation. Journal of Wildlife Management 69 (1): 14-19. Braack, L.E.O., and Smuts, R. (Eds.) 2006. Towards rationalizing transboundary elephant management and human needs in the Kavango/mid-Zambezi region. Unpublished proceedings of a workshop presented in Gaborone, Botswana, by Conservation International (Southern Africa Wilderness and Transfrontier Conservation Programme), Cape Town, South Africa. Campbell AC, (1990) History of Elephants in Botswana, in: The Future of Botswana’s Elephants, Workshop of the Kalahari Conservation Society and the Department of Wildlife and National Parks. 5-15. Cited in DG Ecological Consulting. Undated Review of the 1991 Elephant Conservation and Management Plan: Issues, Options and Recommendations for Elephant management in Botswana. Carrington, R. (1958) Elephants. Chatto and Wndus, London.

A50 A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. A51 KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures

References Conservation International. Maun, Botswana. Chase, M. (2006) The Population Status, Ecology and Transboundary Movements of Elephants in the Okavango Upper Zambezi Transfrontier Conservation Area. OUZTFCA Elephant Project Report. Conservation International. Maun, Botswana. African Elephant Specialist Group (1998) Report of the African Elephant Specialist Group, IUCN, Species Survival Commission Chase, M, & Curtice R. Griffin (2009) Elephants caught in the middle: impacts of war, fences and people on elephant African Elephant Specialist Group (2000) Fencing and other barriers against problem elephants. AfESG Technical Brief Series. distribution and abundance in the Caprivi Strip, Namibia African Journal of Ecology, 47, 223–233. IUCN African Elephant Specialist Group, Human Elephant Conflict Working Group. Available at: Chiyo, P., Cochrane, E.P., Naughton, L. and Basuta, G.I. (2005) Temporal patterns of crop raiding by elephants: a response to http://www.africanelephant .org/hec/pdfs/hecfencen.pdf forage quality or crop availability. African Journal of Ecology 43: 48-55. African Elephant Specialist Group (2002) Review of compensation schemes for agricultural and other damage caused by Chomba C, Senzota R, Chabwela H, Mwitwa J, & Nyirenda V (2011) Pattern of human-wildlife conflicts in Zambia: causes, elephants. Technical brief, Human- Elephant Conflict Working Group, African Elephant Specialist Group, IUCN, consequences and management responses. Journal of Ecology and the Natural Environment. 4(12):303-313. Gland, Switzerland. Churchill, C. 2006. Protecting the Poor: A Micro Insurance Compendium. ILO, Geneva, Switzerland. Allaway, J. D. (1979) Elephants and their interaction with people in the Tana River region of Kenya, Unpublished PhD Thesis, Cline, R.; Sexton, N. & Stewart, S.C. (2007): A human-dimensions review of human-wildlife disturbance: a literature review of Cornell University, Ithaca, New York. impacts, frameworks, and management solutions (Report) U.S. Geological Survey. p. 2. Open-File Report 2007-1111. Anstey, S. (2010) HEC Vertical integration model, Mozambique and Tanzania. IUCN AfESG, Nairobi. Clutton-Brock, J. (1998) Cattle, sheep and goats south of the Sahara: an archaezoological perspective. In The origins and Anon, M. (2000) Report of the Central Unit Anti-Poaching Unit, Guruve RDC, Mushumbi Pools. 12 PGs typescript. development of African livestock: archaeology, genetics, linguistics and ethnography, ed. R.M. Blench and D.W. Anderson, J.L and Pariela, F., (2005) Strategies to mitigate human-wildlife conflicts in Mozambique, Food and Agriculture Macdonald. London: University College London Press. Organization of the United Nations Rome, Italy. Conover, M. (2002) Resolving human-wildlife conflicts: the science of wildlife damage management. Lewis Publishers, New Arntzen, J. W., D.L. Molokomme, E. M. Terry, N. Moleele, O. Tshosa and D. Mazambani. (2003) Final Report of the Review of York. Community-Based Natural Resource Management in Botswana. Report prepared by the Centre for Applied Research Cozza, K., Fico, R., Battistini, M.L., & Rogers, E. (1996) The damage -conservation interface illustrated by predation on for the National CBNRM forum. Gaborone. domestic livestock in central Italy. Journal of Biological Conservation. 78, 329-336. Baldwin G. & La Grange M, (2013) Chemical Control of the Chacma Baboon (Papio ursinus) Crosby, A. W. (1986) Ecological Imperialism: the Biological Expansion of Europe, 900-1900. Cambridge University Press, on Hippo Valley and Triangle Sugar Estates Chiredzi - Internal report. Cambridge. Barnes, R. F. W. (1996) The conflict between humans and elephants in the central African forests.Mammal Review, 26(2/3): Cunliffe, R (2008) An Assessment of Ngongo, Ngcusha and Shamamputu villages with in the Mucosso Reserve. Consultant report 67-80. prepared for Okavango Integrated River Basin Management Project (IRBM) Gaborone, Botswana Barnes, R. F. W. (2002) Treating crop raiding elephants with aspirin. Pachyderm, 33, 96-99. Davies, C. (1999) Aerial census of the Zambezi Valley. WWF Harare, Zimbabwe. Bell, R. H. V. (1984) The man-animal interface: an assessment of crop damage and wildlife control in Conservation and Wildlife De Klemm, C. (1996) Compensation for Damage Caused by Wild Animals. Nature and Environment # 84. Council of Europe Management in Africa: Bell, R. H.V. and Mcshane-Caluzi (Eds.) US Peace Corps Seminar, Malawi. Publishing. Strasbourg, France. Bennett, A. F. (2003) Linkages in the landscape: The role of corridors and connectivity in wildlife conservation. IUCN, Gland, Delsink, A., Bertschinger, H.J., Kirkpatrick, J.F., DeNys, H., Grobler, D., van Altena, J.J. & Turkstra, J. (2003) Contraception of Switzerland. African elephant cows in two private conservancies using porcine Zona pellucida vaccine and the control of aggressive Bendsen, H. and T. Meyer (2003) The Dynamics of the Land Use Systems in Ngamiland: Changing Livelihood Options and behaviour in elephant bulls with GnRH vaccine. In: Control of Wild Elephant Populations. Utrecht University, The Strategies. Harry Oppenheimer Okavango Research Centre and German Development Service – DED, Maun, Netherlands. pp 43-45. Botswana Desai, A. A. (2002) Design of Human-Elephant Conflict Mitigation Strategy for the Proposed Tesso Nilo Protected Area, and Bennett, A.F., (2003). Linkages in the Landscape: The Role of Corridors and Connectivity in Wildlife Conservation. IUCN Gland, Possible Expansion of Such Strategy into the Tesso Nilo Conservation Landscape, and the Province of Riau. WWF Switzerland and Cambridge, UK. Indonesia, Jakarta. Berger, L.R. (2006) Predatory Bird Damage to the Taung Type-Skull of Australopithecus africanus (Dart 1925). American Journal De Silva, M. & De Silva, P.K. (2007) The Sri Lankan Elephant: Its Evolution, Ecology and Conservation. WHT Publications, of Physical Anthropology, 131:166–168. Colombo, Sri Lanka. Binot, A, Blomley T, Coad, L, Nelson F, Roe, D, and Sandbrook, C, (2009) Community Involvement in natural resources DG Ecological Consulting (2013) Review of the 1991 Elephant Conservation and Management Plan: Issues, Options and Rec- management in Africa: Regional overviews, in Roe, D, Nelson, F, and SandBrook, C (eds) Community management of ommendations for Elephant Management in Botswana. (DG Ecological Consulting) Windhoek, Namibia. natural resources in Africa: impacts, experience and future directions IIED, London, UK. DWNP (2006) Draft national policy for the conservation and management of elephants in Botswana. Department of Wildlife Blanc, J.J., Barnes, R.F.W. Craig, G.C. Dublin, H.T. Thouless, C.R. Douglas-Hamilton, I. and Hart, J.A. (2007) African Elephant and National Parks. Gaborone, Botswana. Status Report 2007: An Update from the African Elephant Database. IUCN, Gland DWNP (1998) Guidelines for Compensation. Department of Wildlife and National Parks, Gaborone, Botswana. B. M. A. Oswin Perera (2009). The Human-Elephant Conflict: A Review of Current Status and Mitigation Methods,Gajaha, 30; Desai, A. A. (2002) Design of Human-Elephant Conflict Mitigation Strategy for the Proposed Tesso Nilo Protected Area, and 41-52. Possible Expansion of Such Strategy into the Tesso Nilo Conservation Landscape, and the Province of Riau. WWF Bourquin S.L, & Shacks V.A. (2015) Okavango Crocodile Monitoring Programme: Past, Present and Future. Botswana Indonesia, Jakarta. Symposium on Wetlands and Wildlife, Natural resource research: Implications for management and conservation. de Klemm, C. (1996) Compensation for Damage Caused by Wild Animals. Strasbourg, France: Council of Europe. Okavango Research Institute, University of Botswana, Maun, Botswana. Du Plessis, P. (2009) Potential new methods and approaches to support Problem Animal Control in rural communities in Boudreaux, K. C. (2010) Community Conservation in Namibia: Devolution as a Tool for the Legal Empowerment of the Poor. Southern Province of Zambia, Unpublished report to the Elephant Pepper Development Trust and EC in the project: Working Paper, No. 10-64. Protecting the environment through trade in high value chilli peppers. Boudreaux, K. (2005) The role of Property Rights as an Institution: Implications for Development Policy, Mercatus Policy Series Distefano, E. (2005) Human-Wildlife Conflict worldwide: collection of case studies, analysis of management strategies and no. 2, Mercatus Centre at George Mason University, Airlington, VA. good practices. FAO. Rome Bowen-Jones, E. (2012) Financial mechanisms for addressing Human Wildlife Conflict; with particular reference to institutional Elliot, W., Kube R, and Montanye, D. (2008) Common Ground; Solutions for reducing the human, economic and conservation aspects therein. IIED Case Study Summaries. costs of human wildlife conflict. WWF Report, Gland, Switzerland. Bulte, E.H. & Rondeau, D. (2005): Why compensating wildlife damages may be bad for conservation. Journal of Wildlife Eltringham, S. K. (1980) The Ecology and Conservation of Large African Mammals. The Macmillan Press, London, UK. Management 69 (1): 14-19. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. (2009) Human-wildlife conflict in Africa; Causes, consequences and Braack, L.E.O., and Smuts, R. (Eds.) 2006. Towards rationalizing transboundary elephant management and human needs in the management strategies, Rome, Italy. Kavango/mid-Zambezi region. Unpublished proceedings of a workshop presented in Gaborone, Botswana, by Fayrer-Hosken, R. (2008) Controlling animal populations using anti-fertility vaccines. Reproduction in Domestic Animals 43 Conservation International (Southern Africa Wilderness and Transfrontier Conservation Programme), Cape Town, (Suppl. 2): 179-185. South Africa. Fergusson, R. A. (2008) Techniques for Mitigation of Crocodile Attacks on Rural Communities in Africa. FAO of the UN, Rome, Campbell AC, (1990) History of Elephants in Botswana, in: The Future of Botswana’s Elephants, Workshop of the Kalahari Italy. Conservation Society and the Department of Wildlife and National Parks. 5-15. Cited in DG Ecological Consulting. Ferguson, K. & Hanks, J. eds. (2010) Fencing Impacts: A review of the environmental, social and economic impacts of game and Undated Review of the 1991 Elephant Conservation and Management Plan: Issues, Options and Recommendations veterinary fencing in Africa with particular reference to the Great Limpopo and Kavango-Zambezi Transfrontier for Elephant management in Botswana. Conservation Areas. Pretoria: Mammal Research Institute. Carrington, R. (1958) Elephants. Chatto and Wndus, London. www.wcsahead.org/gltfca_grants/pdfs/ferguson_final_2010.pdf Chase, M. and C. R. Griffin. (2005)Ecology, population structure and movements of elephant populations in northern Botswana. Fisher, M. (2016) Whose conflict is it anyway? Mobilizing research to save lives. Oryx 50(3) 377-378.

A52 A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. A53 KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures

Gadd, M. (2002) Report on the November Field Trip for the Conservation International- Botswana, Human Elephant Conflict Kramer PJ. (1936) Effects of variation in length of day on growth and dormancy of trees. Plant Physiology 11, 127–137 Project. Gaborone, Botswana. Kock M.D. and Burroughs R. (2012) Chemical and Physical Restraint of Wild Animals, 2nd edition, IWVS (Africa) PO Box 106 Gibson, C.C. and Marks, S.A. (1995) Transforming rural hunters into conservationists: an assessment of community-based Greyton 7723 South Africa wildlife management programs in Africa. World Development 23: 941-957. Kwando Carnivore Project (2016) Human-Lion Conflict in the Mudumu South Complex, Zambezi Region, Namibia. Graham, M.D (2006) Coexistence in a land use mosaic? Land use, risk and elephant ecology in Laikipia District, Kenya, PhD http://www.facebook.com/kwandocarnivoreproject Thesis, University of Cambridge, UK Le Bel, S. Taylor R. & La Grange M. (2010) An easy-to-use capsicum delivery system for crop raiding elephant in Zimbabwe: Hermann, E. (2002). The conflict between lions and cattle in the southern Kalahari. In Lion Conservation Research: Workshop Pachyderm Issue No 47. 2: Modelling Conflict (eds. A.J. Loveridge, T. Lynam & D.W. Macdonald), Vol. 2. WildCRU, Oxford, UK. Lahm, S. (1996) A nation-wide survey of crops raiding by elephants and other species in Gabon. Pachyderm, 21, 69-77 Hanks, J. (2006) Mitigation of human-elephant conflict in the Kavango-Zambezi Transfrontier Conservation Area, with Lamarque, F., J. Anderson, P. Chardonnet, R. Fergusson, M. Lagrange, Y. Osei-Owusu, L. Bakker, U. Belemsobgo, B. Beytell, particular reference to the use of chilli peppers. http://www.conservation-southernafrica.org H. Boulet, B. Soto and P. Tabi Tako-Eta. (2008) Human-wildlife conflict in Africa: An overview of causes, consequences Hanks, J. & Cronwright, R. (2006) Kavango-Zambezi Transfrontier Conservation Area, Prefeasibility study of the proposed Final and management strategies. WORKING PAPER, Rome. Report Volume 1 Prepared by the Transfrontier Conservation Consortium for the Peace Parks Foundation (PPF) on Langbauer, W., Payne, K. B., Chairf, C., Rapaport, L. and Osborn, F. (1991) African elephants respond to distant playbacks of behalf of the Governments of Angola, Botswana, Namibia, Zambia and Zimbabwe. low frequency nonspecific calls. Journal of Experimental Biology, 157, 35-46. Hanks, J. and W. Myburgh (2007) The evolution and progression of Transfrontier Conservation Areas in the Southern African Lines, Robin (2015) Landscape Connectivity at the Kafue-KAZA Interface Midterm Report, August 2015. Development Community Chapter 9. in The status of Transfrontier Conservation Areas in Southern Africa Loewe, M. (2006) Downscaling, upgrading or linking? Ways to realize micro-insurance. International Social Security Review. atusHanks, of TransfrontierJ (2013) Hunting: Conservation The Great Areas Debate. in Southern Africa Geographic, Africa. Biodiversity Nov. 33-37 and www.africageographic.com.Protected Areas. Environment 16. 26pp. Vol. 59. Hanssen,Hanks, J. andL, Funston, W. Myburgh P, Fwelimbi, (2013) TheP and Status Siyanga, of Transfrontier O. (2014) Human-Lion Conservation Conflict Areas in in Southern the Mudumu Africa. South Biodiversity Complex, and ZambeziProtected McGregor, J. (2004) Crocodile crimes: people versus wildlife and the politics of postcolonial conservation on Lake Kariba, Region,Areas. Environment Namibia Kwando 16. 26pp. Carnivore Project. Zimbabwe. Geoforum, 36(3):353-369. Hanssen, L, Funston, P, Fwelimbi, P and Siyanga, O. (2014) Human-Lion Conflict in the Mudumu South Complex, Zambezi Madden, F. (2004) Creating Coexistence between Humans and Wildlife: Global Perspectives on Local Efforts to Address Region, Namibia Kwando Carnivore Project. Human–Wildlife Conflict.Human Dimensions of Wildlife 9: 247–257. doi: 10.1080/10871200490505675. ISSN Hildebrandt, T.B., Göritz, F., Hermes, R., Reid, C., Dehnhard, M. and Brown, J.L. (2006) Aspects of the reproductive biology 1087-1209 and breeding management of Asian and African elephants Elephas maximus and Loxodonta africana. International Zoo Madhusudan, M.D. (2003) Living amidst large wildlife: livestock and crop depredation by large mammals in the interior villages Yearbook 40: 20-40. of Bhadra Tiger Reserve, South India. Environmental Management 31: 466–475. Medlicott, A. P. (1990) Product specifications and post-harvest handling for fruits and vegetables from the Caribbean. Caricom Hill, C.M. (1997). Crop raiding by wild animals: the farmers’ perspective in an agricultural community in western Uganda. Export Development Project. International Journal of Pest Management 43(1): 77-84. Mentzel, C. & Niskanen (eds) (2014) Evaluation of the Human-Wildlife Conflict Strategy and Action Plan for Mozambique. Hill, C. M, Osborn, F. V, and Plumptre, A. J (2002) Human-Wildlife Conflict. People, Crops and wildlife. Conflict of Interests: Experts Review, Questionnaire Evaluation of Implementation and Recommendations. IUCN Eastern and Southern Identifying the problem and possible solutions. Albertine Rift Technical Report Series volume. Wildlife Conservation African Regional Office, Nairobi, Kenya. Society, New York, USA. Messmer, T. A. (2000): Emergence of human–wildlife conflict management: turning challenges into opportunities.International Hoare, R.E. (1999) A Standardized Data Collection and Analysis Protocol for Human-Elephant Confl ict Situation in Africa. Biodeterioration 45:97–100. IUCN/SSC African Elephant Specialist Group, Nairobi, Kenya. Mishra, C., P. Allen, T. McCarthy, M.D. Madhusudan, A. Bayarjargal and H.H.T. Prins (2003) The role of incentive programs in Hoare, R.E. (2000). African elephants and humans in conflict: the outlook for coexistence.Oryx 34(1): 34-38. conserving snow leopard. Conservation Biology 17: 1512–1520. Hoare, R. (2012) Lessons from 15 years of human–elephant conflict mitigation: Management considerations involving Morrison, K., Victurine, R. and Mishra, C. (2009) Lessons Learned, Opportunities and Innovations in Human Wildlife Conflict biological, physical and governance issues in Africa. Pachyderm, 51, 60-74 Compensation and Insurance Schemes, Wildlife Conservation Society, New York, USA. Inamdar, A. (1996) The ecological consequences of elephant depletion. Unpublished PhD Thesis, University of Cambridge. Mosojane, S. (2004) Human-elephant conflict along the Okavango Panhandle in northern Botswana MSc. (Conservation Ecology Jones, B.T.B. (2004) Synthesis of the current status of CBNRM Policy and Legislation in Botswana, Malawi, Mozambique, and Planning) University of Pretoria. Namibia, Zambia and Zimbabwe. Murphy, C. (2007) Community based crocodile management. Travel News Namibia. Jones, B.T.B and Barnes, J. I. (2006) Human Wildlife Conflict Study. Namibian Case Study. Murphy, C. (2009) Imusho Ward, Sioma Ngweze National Park, Western Province Zambia: A Participatory Assessment by farmers Kangwana, K.F. (1993) Elephants and Maasai: Conflict and conservation in Amboseli, Kenya.PhD Thesis. Cambridge University. of the success of use of chilli as an elephant deterrent. Consultant Report to IRDNC, Kitima Milimo, Namibia. Kenya Wildlife Service. 1996. Wildlife-human conflicts, sources, solutions and issues. Available at:www.safariweb.com/kwild/ Muruthi, P. (2005) Human Wildlife Conflict: Lessons Learned from AWF’s Africa Heartlands. African Wildlife Foundation Work- wildlife.htm ing Papers. Kgathi, D. L, Mmopelwa, G, Mashabe B & Mosepele, K (2012) Livestock predation, household adaptation and compensation Naidoo, R. L., Weaver, C., Diggle, R. W., Matongo, G., Stuart-Hill, G & Thouless, C. (2016) Importance of local values to suc- policy: a case study of Shorobe Village in northern Botswana, Agrekon: Agricultural Economics Research, Policy and cessful conservation: response to Jacquet and Delon, Conservation Biology, 30, 4, 912. Practice in Southern Africa, 51:2, 22-37 Namibia Nature Foundation (2104) Protecting Livestock to Reduce Human-Wildlife Conflict in the Southern Kunene Conservan- Karidozo, M. (2008) Community Based Human-Elephant Conflict Mitigation Training and Establishment of Demonstration Sites cies. Final Report- Conservancy Development Support Grant Fund, Windhoek, Namibia. Report. Consultant report EPDT Divundu,Namibia and Muccuso, Angola. Naughton-Treves, L. (1998) Predicting patterns of crop damage by wildlife around Kibale National Park, Uganda. Conservation Karidozo, M. and Osborn, F. V. (2005) Can Bees deter elephants from raiding crops? An experiment in the communal lands of Biology 12(1): 156-168. Zimbabwe, Pachyderm 39, 26-32. Visit web: Naughton-Treves, L. (1996). Uneasy Neighbours: wildlife and farmers around Kibale National Park, Uganda. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Florida. KAZA (2012) Secretariat website www.kavangozambezi.orghttp://www.fao.org/3/a-au241e.pdf Naughton, L., Rose, R. and Treves, A. (1999) The social dimensions of human-elephant conflict in Africa: A literature review and King, L.E. (2010) The interaction between the African elephant (Loxodonta africana africana) and the African honey bee (Apis case studies from Uganda and Cameroon. A report to the African Elephant Specialist Group, Human-Elephant Conflict mellifera scutellata) and its potential application as an elephant deterrent. DPhil thesis. University of Oxford, UK. Task Force of IUCN, Glands, Switzerland. King, L.E. (2012) Beehive Fence Construction Manual, The Elephants and Bees Project, Save the Elephants Nairobi, Kenya. Nelson, A. Bidwell, P. & Sillero-Zubiri, C. (2003) A Review of Human Elephant Conflict Management Strategies. People and Kline, R. (2013) PATHWAYS for People & Predators; The Annual Report of Cheetah Conservation Botswana April 2012 - March Wildlife Initiative, Wildlife Conservation Research Unit, Oxford University, United Kingdom. 2013 Neumann, A.H. (1898) Elephant Hunting in East Equatorial Africa. London: Rowland Ward Ltd. http://www.cheetahconservationbotswana.org/uploads/6/4/3/3/64330039/ccb_annual_report_apr12-mar13_pdf.pdf Nyhus, P.J., S.A. Osofsky, P. Ferraro, F. Madden and H. Fischer. (2003) Bearing the costs of human-wildlife conflict: the challenges of compensation schemes. (R. Woodroffe, S. Thirgood, A. Rabinowitz, (eds.). Pp. 107-121 in People and Wildlife, Conflict or Coexistence?Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

A54 A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. A55 KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures KAZA TFCA –– Human wildlife conflict mitigation measures

Nyhus, P.J., H. Fischer, F. Madden and S. Osofsky. (2003) Taking the bite out of wildlife damage: the challenges of wildlife Skarpe, C. & 21 authors (2004) The return of the giants: ecological effects of an increasing elephant population. Ambio, 33, compensation schemes. Conservation in Practice 4: 37–40. 276-282. O’Connell-Rodwell, C. E., Rodwell, T., Rice, M. and Hart, L. A. (2000). Living with the modern conservation paradigm: Can Smith, R.J. & Kasiki, S. (2000) A spatial analysis of human-elephant conflict in the Tsavo ecosystem, Kenya.AfESG agricultural communities co-exist with elephants? A five-year case study in east Caprivi, Namibia. Biological Human-Elephant conflict Task Force report. IUCN SSC African Elephant Specialist Group, Gland, Switzerland. Conservation 93 (3), 381-391. Songhurst, A., M. Chase, and T. Coulson. 2015a. Using simulations of past and present elephant (Loxodonta africana) Oldfather, C. H. (trans.) (1979). Diodorus Siculus, Vol. 2. Loeb Classical Library. Harvard University Press, Cambridge. population numbers in the Okavango Delta Panhandle, Botswana to improve future population estimates. Wetlands Oliver, R.C.D. (1978) On the ecology of the Asian elephant. PhD thesis, University of Cambridge. Ecology and Management 23:1-20. Osborn, F.V. & Anstey, S. (2007) Elephant/ Human Conflict and Community Development around the Niassa Reserve, Songhurst, A. McCulloch, G. and Coulson, T. (2015b) Finding pathways to human–elephant coexistence: a risky business. Oryx, Mozambique. WWF Southern African Regional Programme. www.Elephantpepper.org/downloads/ available on CJO2015. doi:10.1017/S0030605315000344. Osborn, F. V. and Welford, L. A. (1997) Living With Elephants: a manual for wildlife managers in the SADC region. SADC/ Songhurst, A. (in press). Measuring Human-Wildlife Conflict - comparing insights from a government approach with an IUCN NRMP, Malawi. data collection protocol. Wildlife Society Bulletin Osborn, F. V. (1998) The ecology of crop-raiding elephants in Zimbabwe. Unpublished PhD Thesis, University of Cambridge, Spinage, C.A. (1994) Elephants. London: T & A D Poyser Ltd. Cambridge, UK. Steinhart, E.I. (1989) Hunters, poachers and gamekeepers: towards a social history of hunting in colonial Kenya. Journal of Osborn, F. V. (2004) Seasonal variation of feeding patterns and food selection by crop-raiding elephants in Zimbabwe. African African History 30: 247-264. Journal of Ecology 42: 322-327. Stiles, D. (2004) The ivory trade and elephant conservation. Environmental Conservation, 31 (4): 309–321. Osborn, F.V. & Parker, G. (2003a). Linking two elephant refuges with a corridor in the communal lands of Zimbabwe. African Stout, T.A.E., Bertschinger. H. J. & Colenbrander, B. (2007) The use of GnRH vaccines for reproductive suppression in horses Journal of Ecology 41: 68-74. and elephants. In: EU-Asia Link Project Symposium “Managing the Health and Reproduction of Elephant Populations Osborn, F.V. & Parker G.E. (2003b) Towards an integrated approach for reducing the conflict between elephants and people: a in Asia”. Kasetsart University, Bangkok, Thailand. pp 114-116. review of current research. Oryx Vol. 37 (1): 80-84. Stander, P.E. (1990) A suggested management strategy for stock-raiding lions in Parker, I.S.C. and Graham, A.D. (1983) Rainfall, geology, elephants and men. In Symposium on the extinction alternative, (ed). Namibia. South African Journal of Wildlife Research, 20: 37–43. P.J. Mundy. Johannesburg: Endangered Wildlife Trust. Stander, P.E. (2000) Conservation of lions and other large carnivores in the Kunene region, Namibia. African Lion News, Parker, I. S. C. (1984) The nature and interaction between humans and wildlife. In: Conservation in Africa. Bell, R. H .V, and 2: 8 - 9 McShane-Causely, E. (eds.), US Peace Corps, Malawi. Sukumar, R. (1990) Ecology of the Asian Elephant in Southern India II: feeding habits and crop-raiding patterns. Journal of Parker, I.S.C. and Graham, A.D. (1989) Man, Elephants & Competition. Symposium of the Zoological Society of London, Tropical Ecology 6: 33-53. 61:241-252. Sukumar, R. (1989) The Asian elephant: ecology and management. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK. Parker, G.E. (2006) The Costs and Benefits of Elephants: Communities and the CAMPFIRE Programme in Zimbabwe, Taylor, R.D. (1993a) Elephant management in Nyami-Nyami District: Turning a liability into an asset. Pachyderm 17:19-29. Unpublished PhD Thesis, University of Kent, UK. Taylor, R.D. (1993b) Wildlife management and utilization in a Zimbabwean communal Parker, G.E., Osborn, F.V., Hoare R.E. and Niskanen, L.S. (eds.) (2007) Human-Elephant Conflict Mitigation: A Training Course land: a preliminary evaluation in Nyami-Nyami District, Kariba. WWF MAPS Project Paper No. 32. Harare, Zimbabwe, for Community-Based Approaches in Africa. Participant’s Manual. Elephant Pepper Development Trust, Livingstone, WWF Southern Africa Regional Office. Zambia and IUCN/SSC AfESG, Nairobi, Kenya. Taylor, R.D. (1999) A review of problem elephant policies and management options in Southern Africa. HEC Task Force, IUCN Parker, G. (2004) Ensuring Farmer’s Livelihoods and Food Security Around Kakum Conservation Area. Proceedings of the AfESG, Nairobi. ‘Training of Trainers’ workshop. UN/FAO Regional Office for Africa, Accra Ghana Tchamba, M. (1996) History and present status of the human/elephant conflict in the Waza-Logone region, Cameroon, West Parker, I. (2004) What I tell you three times is true: conservation, ivory, history and politics. Librario Publishing, Moray, Scotland. Africa. Biological Conservation 75: 35-41. Pittiglio, C. Skidmore, AK, Hein, AM van Gils, McCall, M.K.& Prins (2013) Smallholder farms as stepping stone corridors for Tembo, A. (1995) A survey of large mammals in Sioma-Ngwezi National Park. African Journal of Ecology 33(2): 173-174. crop-raiding elephant in northern Tanzania: Integration of Bayesian Expert System and Network Simulator. Ambio, Thomson, J. (1885) Through Masai Land. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. 10.1007/s13280-0130-0437-z. Thouless, C. (1994) Conflict between humans and elephants on private land in northern Kenya. Oryx 28(2): 119-127. Thouless, C. R. and Sakwa, J. (1995) Shocking elephants: fences and crop raiders in Laikipia District, Kenya. Biological Conser- Pooley, S. (2015) Using predator attack data to save lives, human and crocodilian Oryx, 49(4), 581–583 vation, 72, 99-107. Potgieter, G. (2014) Protecting Livestock to Reduce Human-Wildlife Conflict in the Southern Kunene Conservancies. (CDSGF) Thomas, G. (2006) Crocodile/human conflict in the Okavango Delta, MSc, Botswana. Grant, Namibia Nature Foundation. von Gerhardt, K., Van Niekerk, A., Kidd, M., Samways, M. & Hanks, J. (2013) Long-range movements of three savannah Purseglove, J. W. (1972) Tropical Corps. Vol. 2, Longman Group Ltd., London. elephants within a Transfrontier Conservation Area (TFCA): implications for management. Oryx: 1-9.doi:10.1017/ Rasmussen, G.S.A.(1999) Livestock predation by the painted hunting dog Lycaon pictus in a cattle ranching region of S003060531200138X Zimbabwe: a case study. 133±139 Biological Conservation 88. van Aarde, R (2006) Delineating Ecological linkages between key components of the Kavango-Zambezi Transfrontier Rasmussen, L. E. L., Hess, D. L. and Hall-Martin, A. (1996) Chemical profiles of African bull elephants Loxodonta( africana); conservation areas. PPF/P/3-80.sheircare to avoid going from plural to singular and back again. electric fences not Physiological and ecological implications. Journal of Mammalogy, 77, 422-439. realistic? Edits required in the box. od? Ron, T. and T. Golan. (2010) Angolan Rendezvous: Man and Nature in the Shadow of War. 30 Degrees South, SA. 243 pp. Wagner, K. K., R. H. Schmidt & M. R. Conover (1997) Compensation programs for wildlife damage in North America. Wildlife (2006, in Hebrew, Am Oved Publishers Ltd, Tel-Aviv; 2007, in Portuguese, Cha de Caxinde and Prefacio, Luanda and Society Bulletin, 25, 312-319 Lisbon). Whyte, I. (1993) The movement patterns of elephant in the Kruger National park in response to culling and environmental Seidensticker, J. (1984) Managing Elephant Depredation in Agricultural and Forestry Projects. The World Bank, Washington, D. stimuli. Pachyderm, 16, 72-79. C. Williams, A.C. Johnsingh, A.J.T. & Krausman, P.R. (2001) Elephant-human conflicts in Rajaji National Park, north-western India. Selous, F.C. (1881) A Hunter’s Wanderings in Africa. London: Richard Bentley & Son, London. Wildlife Society Bulletin 29 (4): 1097-1104. Sitati, N. (2001) Human-Elephant Conflict in Transmara District, Kenya. In:Wildlife and WWF (2000). Problem animal reporting, Wildlife Management Series, World Wide Fund for Nature, SARPO, Harare, People: Conflict and Conservation in Maasai Mara, Kenya, eds. M.J. Walpole, G.G. Karanja, N.S. Wasilwa & N. Zimbabwe. Leader-Williams. Masai Mara National Reserve and adjacent districts: Durrell Institute of Conservation and Ecology, WWF (1997) Conserving Africa’s elephants: current issues and priorities for action. Dublin, H.T., McShane, T.O. & J. Newby, University of Kent. (eds) World Wide Fund for Nature International Report, Gland, Switzerland. Sitati, N.W., Walpole, M.J., Smith, R.J. and Leader-Williams, N. (2003) Predicting spatial aspects of human-elephant conflict. WWF SARPO, (2005) Human Wildlife Conflict Manual. Harare: World Wide Fund for Nature Southern African Regional Journal of Applied Ecology 40: 667- 677. Programme Office (SARPO) Harare, Zimbabwe. Sitati, N.W., Walpole, M.J. and Leader-Williams, N. (2005) Factors affecting susceptibility of farms to crop-raiding by African Young, T.P., Palmer, T.M. and Gadd, M.E. (2005) Competition and compensation among cattle, zebras and elephants in a elephants: using a predictive model to mitigate conflict,Journal of Applied Ecology 42: 1175-1182. semi-arid savannah in Laikipia, Kenya. Biological Conservation 122: 351-359.

A56 A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. A unique conservation, tourism and sustainable development partnership. A57 Enquiries KAZA TFCA Secretariat PO Box 821 Kasane Botswana Tel: +267 625 1332/1269/1452 Fax: +267 625 1400 Email: [email protected]